Peter Singer in his article argues that we are bound by
morality to be extraordinarily charitable to people suffering from poverty in
the 3
rd world country and that it is immoral for us to spend money
on luxury items which include everything but the necessities. Singer says that morality gives us no choice
but to sacrifice all our financial security and any surplus income by
discussing 2 simple examples where we can all agree on what ought to be done
and drawing parallels from them to a typical American middle-class household with
“surplus income” but does not donate to save the children who are dying from
causes that can easily be avoided or treatable such as hunger or diarrhea. I want to simply walk through his examples
and consider what possible repercussions that we may face if a significant
number of us follow through on his solution.
