ESOL 400 “The singer solution to World Poverty”
The Singer’s solution focuses on how the rich and developed nations and their citizens, who earn surplus income, can help the children in poor countries to survive. The situation in the poor nations is so bad that hunger, easily curable diseases like malaria and diarrhea have ravaged the health of children and even led to death. The poor countries cannot afford to provide for the citizens, most of them do not have proper basic needs like shelter, food and clothing. Their fate relies on the foreign aid from the rich countries and the charitable organizations such as Oxfam America and the UNICEF. The charitable organizations do not generate their own money; they actually depend on donations and grants from willing individuals and the governments. The United Nations requirement is that every rich and developed nation should donate at least 0.7 percent of its annual gross national product to charity. However, most rich countries have not achieved this provision apart from a few like Denmark, whose 0.97 percent of the gross national output goes to helping the poor.
The Singer’s solution is based on the ideology that every individual should take the responsibility to take part in helping the poor people. The middle income and the rich earners in the developed world can help eradicate poverty by setting aside a portion of their income to help the poor. Experts in the charitable organizations approximate that as little as 200 dollars can help save a two year old child to live a healthy comfortable life until he or she is six years old. That is quite a very little amount, which if every middle and high income earners in the United States alone make their contributions, can help save the lives of millions of young children in poor and war ravaged countries such as Sudan, Somali, Congo and Uganda in Africa.
Singer uses the common example of a Brazilian movie called Central Station to convince the public to make their donations. This is not to make the public feel sorry for not making donations, it is a way of making people realize or see the sense in the need to take part in charity. In the movie, a retired teacher who made very little income from writing, letters at a bus station ends up in a dilemma. Mrs. Dora is promised a thousand dollars if she brought a nine year old kid to be adopted. She does as required but the tough part is when she realizes that the child was being peddled for organ transplants. Dora does what many people would not do in an ideal world; she sets off on the mission to rescue him! The moral lesson here is simple, that if someone can do something to help another person, then they should do all within their means to help. Dora could have decided not to rescue the child because she had gotten the money and the child was not related to her. However, human conscience determines the decision to help the poor. The decision to forego the one thousand dollars to rescue the boy is what Americans should emulate.
Singer argues that American citizens spend so much of their surplus income on unnecessary and luxury things. He compares these individuals to a heartless individual, who in Dora’s situation would enjoy the benefits of the $1000 and let the boy get slaughtered. Individuals are well aware that there are people in this world who do not have food, shelter or clothing, yet they still do not care about giving to help them. Singer’s solution is that people can forego the luxuries and lavish lifestyles to help the needy get a healthy and comfortable life. Even though these are people that you will not meet, it is ethical that they need help and you can give. This is based on a utilitarian philosophy where an individual’s act is judged basing on its impact. If people do not donate money, the poor children suffer and die. It is, therefore, logical that the rich and middle income earners help those who are in need.
Another example from a New York University philosopher, Unger, is about Bob. Bob finds himself in a tough situation where he has to choose between saving a child’s life or his own future, a valuable Bugatti car. With the retirement close, his future benefits were dependent on the car. Bob decides to let the train kill an innocent child at the expense of his future. He had the chance to avoid the accident, even though it would cost him his own future status. In the public eye, this is very unfair. However, most Americans are similar to Bob in that they do not help in alleviating poverty themselves which results in the death of millions of children annually. This is the selfish attitude that most American citizens have. They save the best for themselves while people on the other side of the earth die and suffer. These are the same people who blame people like Bob for not saving one life, when they themselves can help save millions from such a position.
What the philosophers are trying to put across is simple. That the rich and the middle income earners in countries such as America should be shrewd enough to set aside their luxury and unnecessary spending on things such as expensive holidays and material comfort to help alleviate hunger, disease and death in poor nations. The poor people, specifically children, do not have any alternatives; their fate squarely depends on the rich people’s generosity. The rich people should therefore, have a positive attitude and willingly take part in overseas donations. The donations can be made easily using credit or debit cards or by calling toll free numbers belonging to charitable organizations like Oxfam America and UNICEF.
The reasons why people in the developed world do not participate in the donations to save the poor vary from one person to another. Some people just do not have the ethical sense to save the lives of the poor people, whom they do not know and will never meet. Other people do not take part in this important activity, would be a solution to world poverty, because they think their contributions would never reach the targeted poor. There could be some truth in these arguments because some money is set aside for administrative purposes and other necessary costs. However, it has been proven in the past how these organizations spend the donations that the poor benefit fully. These organizations have their own audits showing how the money is spent transparently. Experts have also made a proper provision in the approximate of 200 dollars per child amount where most of the money actually reaches the target.
There are many rich people who can make contributions to save the poor; however, most of them do not take part in this very charitable exercise. This implies that more and more children die because they do not help in time, which is very unfair. People need to change the public mentality that charity does not reach its target and help the poor. There are those people who are already making charitable contributions, maybe the $200 that is required. However, that is not enough; one can contribute as much as possible to save more lives. People tend to base their arguments on fairness, they claim that they have made their share and so others should make theirs too. In ideal conditions, a middle income family earns $50000 a year, yet their necessities cost $30000 annually. That family can take $20000 to charity. However outrageous it sounds, it is necessary that people help the poor. If every rich family decided not to donate, the poor will perish. Similarly, the governments should increase the portion of the national budget that goes to the poor people.
There are no definite limits to the maximum amount an individual can donate to charity. However, one can contribute up to the level where the contribution affects their welfare. That is when a contribution reduces the income so that one cannot afford their necessities. The singer’s solution is an approach of eradicating poverty based on the concept of charitable contributions by the governments and the rich individuals in the rich nations. Poverty would be a thing of the past if every able individual took it as a responsibility to help the poor.
References
Singer, P. (1999, September 05). The Singer Solution to World Poverty. Retrieved May 04, 2012, from The New York Times Magazine: http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/19990905mag-poverty-singer.html
