In the article singer is arguing the fact that there is so much suffering happening in the world right now but we as a world don’t care enough to do anything about it because we are too preoccupied with ourselves. Singer know this so he proposes a plan in which we can help the world without harming ourselves in any big way. The way he proposes is this “We ought to be preventing as much suffering as we can without sacrificing something else of comparable moral importance.” His meaning behind this is that we should help out as much as possible as long as we are not hurting ourselves or our dependents or we aren’t injuring ourselves from future giving. He goes on to say that we have obligations to a few people 1 is ourselves and 2 is the people in need.

The obligation we have to ourselves is that obviously take care of ourselves and if we take care of ourselves we should now take care of others. Take all the excess of what we don’t need for basic necessities and maximize our potential to help others in any way possible if it is giving 70% of what we have good if it is giving 40% and using the rest to help big more income for future giving do that. But another person we need to influence with our way of spending is the government and we can influence them by showing that we want to help those in need. We can’t just sit back and say I will give when the government gives. We have to show the initiative and start working toward that so they know that we want to do that so we are letting our money speak for us.

Right now, we our self-centered and so the government is also self-centered.