Global hunger is a major concern that effects the whole world. According to
             Peter Singer "the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme
             needs to be altered... and that the way of life in our society is taken for granted."
             He argues that people have lost touch with what is truly need. Who are the "needy?"
             The homeless are in need help but are not desperate and distraught
             Singer states that suffering and death from the lack of food, shelter, and
             medical care are bad; with that assumption he continues to say "that if it is within
             the power of people to stop suffering, without sacrificing anything of comparable
             Is it morally wrong not to promote something that would stop suffering if
             it is within your power? Singer strongly believes that we (as a society) have a
             moral obligation to sacrifice our wealth even at drastic measures in order to give
             Do we discriminate? People in this country are very skeptic about aiding
             the homeless, but what about those in need overseas. Singer argues that it should
             be no different donating money to a local church/neighborhood or donating to a
             charity that assists starvation around the world.
             One of Singer's proposals to help the problem of starvation and hunger is
             to make everyone donate $5. I agree with Singer if everyone were to give a portion of their wealth to aid those who can't help themselves, that the rate of hunger would drop
             ...