Comparing Hunger And Hunger

1260 Words6 Pages
Hunger and poverty will always exist. Many needy nations are stuck in a black hole, in which, there is no light at the end of the tunnel. This situation could be fixed, if the poor nations had a little help or assistance. Is it morally good for the better off nations to help or support those who are in need? Who benefits from this sponsorship in the long run? Poverty-stricken nations could seek relief if the silk-stocking nations aid in supplying goods. Many of the moneyed nations are torn between helping or not those who are less fortunate. Jonathan Swift and Garrett Hardin have two very different opinions on whether to aid those who were not born into riches. Swift uses a satire for the low-income nations of eating and using offspring…show more content…
There will always be a man walking down the road in search for his next meal. Hunger around the world is real and will continue to be. What if, cannibalism was not frown upon if it was last resort? Swift presented that cannibalism would end the hunger. Husband and wife would have a child, and raise the babe till he is nice and plump, then sell him for this “child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends...” In the proposal, there is a few suggestions on how to cook the tender meat. Swift was implying that the people need to buy each other’s goods and material. Buy groceries at the local market where the transaction will help the neighbor pay rent. Do not buy overseas, for that does nothing to help the community. Harding, opposing that the rich should help the beggar. It is not his fault that a beggar was born in the life he was dealt. The world food bank is a nasty plan in his mind. The people with extra change supply the food bank while the poor take and take. He mentioned it was more of a transaction instead of a bank. The rich put in food, while the poor take and never replace or replenish. Hardin stated, “If each country is solely responsible for its own well-being, poorly managed ones will suffer. But they can learn from experience.” Meaning, each county should tend to its own and learn from their lack of unpreparedness to take care of their people during an…show more content…
Swift has a heart of gold, behind the meaning of cannibalism of the beloved children. Harding would rather turn his back on a beggar than to see on walk the street to feed the kids that night. Swift believes there is way out of poverty. The man who writes the check needs to see to it, that he drops a little change in the pocket of the less fortunate. Meaning the rich nations need to help the poor nations in time of hunger and famine. Harding believes it is not his responsibility to help the helpless, because they will never be able to repay. The poor nations will only use up the riches of the well-off nations, sucking the goods and recourses right out from their

More about Comparing Hunger And Hunger

Open Document