Singer Solution Essay

1049 Words5 Pages
Short Argument Essay I feel that poverty in general is a name that people stamp on their forehead for people to pity them and feel like they need to help them. You might be born into poverty but that isn’t a excuse to stay living in poverty your whole life. Peter Singer, in his essay The Singer Solution to World Poverty, states that “All unnecessary luxury items should be sacrificed for the children in need overseas (Singer)”. He says that all Americans who can afford to donate should donate every cent of their extra money. Singer creates two hypothetical situations to support his argument and to get the reader to ask themselves, "Should I do this or not?". I disagree with Peter Singer’s claim that all unnecessary luxuries should be sacrificed for the children in need overseas because most Americans really don’t have the money to give, if we stop buying the unnecessary items then that leaves people without jobs, and Singer demands we give to the needy but never says whether he does or not. The first reason Singer is incorrect is that he believes this radical theory that Americans should redirect all unnecessary income to organizations aiding victims of poverty. But yet I doubt he stops to think if Americans truly do or don’t have the money to give. When Singer states, "again, the formula is simple: whatever money you're spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away" (Singer) it’s like he believes Americans actually care. Americans work hard for their money, they pay taxes for the right to live in this country and therefore have the right to do whatever they want with their money. As Americans why should we give away our hard earned money when our taxes are being used for it anyway? With this economy the way it is most people don’t have the luxury of writing a check of $20,000 to give to the poor, their hoping for the luxury of being able to pay their
Open Document