In his essay "The Singer Solution to World Poverty," Peter Singer addresses the flaws in society's efforts toward world hunger and poverty. As a piece of literature it is a respectable and eloquent passage, because of its thorough use of analogies and well-structured argument. Singer makes a valid explanation of his intentions and ideas on quite a controversial topic. In general terms and through theoretical examples (one of which is not even developed by him) Peter Singer states that as citizens of this country we are entitled to pay a certain amount of our income to those that are poverty stricken. He begins by offering an example of a woman named Dora and her hypothetical intention of selling a homeless boy for money so that she may by a T.V. and enjoy other such entities of her reward. "...in the end, what is the ethical distinction between a Brazilian who sells a homeless child to organ peddlers and an American who already has a TV and upgrades to a better one . . . " (Singer 518). This sort of argumentation is faulted but the fallacy of "begging the question." Singer's comparison of two ideas that are completely different and trying to compare them in the same sense. He does, however, follow with a distinction between the two, informing the reader that it does take a certain heartlessness to kill a street kid as opposed to the lack thereof when buying a television. Unfortunately, he attempts to compliment that with " – if the upshot of the American's failure to donate the money is that one more kiddie on the streets of a Brazilian city, then it is in some sense just as bad as selling the kid to organ peddlers" (Singer 519). This argument completely contradicts his implied sense of reason in the distinction of the two preceding situations.
             On this subject matter, his idealism is very flawed. First, it is representative of the Utilitarian ideology, "Yet for a utilitarian philosopher like myself." Utilitarianism states that ac...