Famine, Affluence, and Morality .

            I think one of the main arguments and points that Peter Singer focuses on in Famine, Affluence and Morality is how the more advanced and powerful countries should automatically be helping towards those countries of need. I do agree with Singer in that “suffering and death from lack of food, shelter, and medical care are bad”. (231) I agree with Singer that yes we should help the less privilege people during a time of need, but disagree where those people who are considered to be of a higher standard should be required to give as much as they possibly.

            By simply having people donate money to a problem does not guarantee that anything will actually happen at all.  For example if a country decided to take action and aid a country by deploying the appropriate tools needed for the situation, it does not guarantee that the problems will be fixed.  Also another point that can be made when assistance such as the Red Cross is provided many times the aid is not properly and evenly distributed to all of the victims that have been affected. With this being said I think that in some ways Singers points are off and that his ideas would not in fact work to what he would expect.