Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Alleviation of poverty
In discussions of world poverty, a controversial issue has been how to provide aid to countries in need. On the one hand, some argue that aide should be immediate relief of famine, dehydration, and sickness. From this perspective, we should try to save every life that we can. On the other hand, however, others argue that providing immediate relief makes the problem worse. In the words of Garret Hardin, one of this view’s main proponent’s, “As a result of such solutions to food shortage emergencies, the poor countries will not learn to mend their ways, and will suffer progressively greater emergencies as their populations grow” (332). According to this view, famine relief will be detrimental in the long run. There is a shortage of food because the population is too large, and by allowing more people to live and reproduce, the food shortage will become more severe. In sum, then, …show more content…
Many will struggle now, but life will become more sustainable with infrastructure. Hardin shares that, “The modern approach to foreign aid stresses the export of technology and advice, rather than money and food… foundations have financed a number of programs for improving agriculture in the hungry nations.” Increased efficiency and technology is exportable and practical. A Nobel Prize winner developed “miracle plants” that increase yield and resists damage. When innovation leads a nation beyond sustainability, they can enter the international economy. Hardin’s essay has presented a lot of reasons not to provide aid, but he doesn’t address how providing aid can benefit richer countries. When people are able to take care of basic needs, it frees them up to be creative and productive. If more countries can gain access to the Internet, they are opened up to an endless supply of information. Combined with social networking, the ease to share ideas and work together, countries will go beyond taking care of
In his 1972 essay “Famine, Affluence, and Poverty”, Peter Singer tackles what seems on the surface to be a fairly simple debacle. He opens his essay by discussing the lack of food, shelter, and medical care in East Bengal. It is a given that every human deserves, in the very least, food, a place to sleep, and basic medical care. Singer claims that the problems involving poverty around the world is not an inevitable problem. He alleges that if we all pitched in what we can, these problems could be abolished. But unfortunately many people do not want to give up what they have for the sake of others. For these people, Singer put forth his seemingly obvious argument. It goes as follows:
In this paper I will examine both Peter Singer’s and Onora O 'Neill 's positions on famine relief. I will argue that O’Neill’s position is more suitable than Singer’s extreme standpoint. First I will, present O’Neill’s argument. I will then present a possible counter-argument to one of my premises. Finally I will show how this counter-argument is fallacious and how O’Neill’s argument in fact goes through.
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
Many people who read such statement wonder about our obligation towards famine relief, and ask, whether we are morally obliged to spend one dollar in order to prevent such a crisis or not. Forty years ago, Peter Singer answered this question in his article
The decision to end world hunger is a groups effort that can provide little by little from everyone to make a difference that will be effective. “the decision and actions of human beings can prevent this suffering” (Singer 554). The action of the human race itself that re better off can save the life of many suffering that are worse off. Singer takes on the case that it should be a moral duty to help others because people often help those that are in reach to them and ignoring to sacrifice and put the effort to help those that are far of reach from them as well. Singer wants us to follow the famine relief and support those in need even if it means putting aside ours wants and benefiting to those who are suffering needs. “We would not be sacrificing anything significant if we were to continue to wear our old clothes, and give the money to famine relief. By doing so, we would be preventing another person from starving. It follows from what I have said earlier that we ought to give money away, rather than spend it on clothes which we do not need to keep us warm. To do so is not charitable or generous” (singer 557). Giving to a suffering nation should be as enjoyable or even more so than buying a new dress and just because you give it is not a generosity or charitable either because you are supporting life, which should not be an option. If it is in our will to prevent harm,
Wealth is the many fortunes that billions of people have never gotten a glimpse of. In contrast, poverty has drenched the lives of over three billion people; 270 million of these people are Indigenous. The 15 percent of the world’s indigenous poverty resides in Canada. Issues such as land usage, lack of employment, internal conflicts, poor education, and racism are well known factors of poverty. The Indigenous peoples of Canada are predominantly controlled by the issues derived from poverty.
It provides humanitarian relief through sustainable development, creating prosperous communities in which hunger can be eliminated as a humanitarian concern. The philosophies and mission of The Hunger Project extend beyond the need for food and into the need for sustainable development within communities that are suffering from a lack of resources. By donating to this cause, it creates a connection to a larger global, social and political movement. When hunger is eradicated, it changes the use and development of resources while providing a sense of sustainability to the globe at large. My personal contribution holds the intention of not only assisting with humanitarian efforts, but also relates to changing the sociopolitical landscape of the
Poverty has conquered nations around the world, striking the populations down through disease and starvation. Small children with sunken eyes are displayed on national television to remind those sitting in warm, luxiourious houses that living conditions are less than tolerable around the world. Though it is easy to empathize for the poor, it is sometimes harder to reach into our pocketbooks and support them. No one desires people to suffer, but do wealthy nations have a moral obligation to aid poor nations who are unable to help themselves? Garrett Hardin in, "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping The Poor," uses a lifeboat analogy to expose the global negative consequences that could accompany the support of poor nations. Hardin stresses problems including population increase and environmental overuse as downfalls that are necessary to consider for the survival of wealthy nations. In contrast, Peter Singer's piece, "Rich and Poor," remarks on the large differences between living conditions of those in absolute poverty with the wealthy, concluding that the rich nations possess a moral obligation to the poor that surpasses the risks involved. Theodore Sumberg's book, "Foreign Aid As Moral Obligation," documents religious and political views that encourage foreign aid. Kevin M. Morrison and David Weiner, a research analyst and senior fellow respectively at the Overseas Development Council, note the positive impact of foreign aid to America, a wealthy nation. Following the examination of these texts, it seems that not only do we have a moral obligation to the poor, but aiding poor nations is in the best interest of wealthy nations.
In the past ten years the world population exceeded six billion people with most of the growth occurring in the poorest, least developed countries in the world. The rapidly increasing population and the quickly declining amount of land are relative and the rate at which hunger is increasing rises with each passing year. We cannot afford to continue to expand our world population at such an alarming rate, for already we are suffering the consequences. Hunger has been a problem for our world for thousands of years. But now that we have the technology and knowledge to stamp it out, time is running short.
Wealth inequality is the uneven distribution of resources in a given state or population, which can also be called the wealth gap. The sum of one’s total assets excluding the liabilities equates the person’s wealth also known as the net worth. Investments, residents, cash, real estates and everything owned by an individual are their assets.In reality, the United States is among the richest countries in the world, though a few people creating a major gap between the richest, the middle class and the poor control most of its wealth. For more than a quarter of a century, only the rich American families have shown an increase to their net worth.Thisis a worrying fact for the less fortunate in the country and calls for assessment (Baranoff, 2015).
Gans (1971) stated in modern society there are few events that can be considered functional or dysfunctional for society, and that most events result in benefits to some groups, while they present a cost to other groups. Poverty provides a great example of the negative impact on one group of society while providing benefits to another group in society. “All human endeavors have benefits and costs, material and nonmaterial, and that most such endeavors produce benefits for some people and groups and reparations for others. Even some of the most costly social evils benefit someone” (Gans, 2012). Poverty provides numerous benefits for the wealthy. However, the poor can also benefit from the wealthy.
Poverty is in our own backyard. Poverty isn’t turning around a globe and looking toward third world countries for an example. Poverty is everywhere. Poverty is the children down the street who go to bed hungry each night filled only with emptiness. Poverty is my neighbor who had her heat shut off this past winter. However I believe that poverty is preventable.
One of the most complex issues in the world today concerns human population. The number of people living off the earth’s resources and stressing its ecosystem has doubled in just forty years. In 1960 there were 3 billion of us; today there are 6 billion. We have no idea what maximum number of people the earth will support. Therefore, the very first question that comes into people’s mind is that are there enough food for all of us in the future? There is no answer for that. Food shortage has become a serious problem among many countries around the world. There are many different reasons why people are starving all over the world. The lack of economic justice and water shortages are just merely two examples out of them all.
Without access to outside food the population in poorer countries drops and is “checked” by crop failures and famines. But access to outside food could be a problem because “if they can always draw on a world food bank in time of need, their populations can continue to grow unchecked, and so will their “need” for aid”(333). Poorer countries’ populations could surpass richer countries, then poorer countries will receive even more resources and give basically nothing, while the rich receive even less but give
Hunger and poverty have been a major problem in the world, which has being leading most people to death than cancer, Ebola, and malaria do. More than thousands of people die from hunger and poverty, and most of the people who suffer most are children below the age of ten. Hunger and poverty have contributed to the world food crisis that has an impact on the economy, the environment, and political issues. People living with hunger and poverty are more than those living a successful life in both developed and developing the world. Hunger makes victims live underweight, causing numerous of sickness to their health. Lack of