Singer's flaw

In Singer's piece the idea he initiates with is that those who have surplus must trickle down to those who are in a more distressed situation. In times of other people´s need we have to cut back and support other impoverished nations or those that cannot seem to hold themselves together. During times where famine is prevalent and there is an increase in the number of impoverished people elsewhere in the world, it is up to the nations with more to give charity to those in need.

Although "suffering from and death from lack of food shelter and medical care , (Singer 231)" is horrifying I do not see the real benefit in doing this. If an area is under risk from of being impoverished and is in a  circumstance where there are too many people for the area to support it seems to be the failure of the government not the responsibility of others. There is a incorrect point to the argument in that we can provide bulk aid like that at a moments notice in enough of an amount to save everyone. This notion seems to be very idealistic and its not going to happen if we rely on the same organizations that have been doing those tasks for last few decades, like the red cross that have slow recovery in even the most modern of incidents. Most aid relief doesn't get to victims unless its physical donations and not monetary, then when aid gets there it doesn't get evenly distributed and all the money that was put in eventually leads to nothing getting done because organization of resources isn't stable. What Singer should really focus on is prevention, if we truly want to help those in other countries that are unfortunate we should really help their infrastructure so that aid work is only needed at times of absolute desperation. In Bengal what should have been done is that beforehand, governments should have looked at how much population the area could sustain and relocate those who are excess. This way evacuation goes smoother and the government can manage more rather than begging for relief aid. Its useless to give to something that will only consume but never become stronger, the necessity lies in making it stronger through proper funding rather than bulk relief aid at the site of a disaster and calling it humanitarianism.