The Solution to World Poverty

In finishing the essay, “The Solution to World Poverty” by Peter Singer, I found myself immediately disagreeing with his closing comment that “we are all in that situation” that Singer hypothetically creates in order to get across his point of humanities ignorance to help even when they are able.  In addition I found myself with few exceptions, disagreeing with the essay as a whole.  Singer makes some very strong points,  yes, we as an entire whole of humanity have created focuses and priorities that do not match up with the morals that a majority of us claim to follow.  We spend money selfishly and flippantly without thinking of others and the repercussions that are frivolous behavior could be having, but his overall point that there is relevance between intentionally choosing to pick a material object over the life of another person is hyperbolic and all around just untrue.  Choosing to save a priceless car over the life of a child is not equivalent to going on a shopping spree rather than donating a large sum of money to UNICEF.  The moral implications and consequences of both may be relatable but the overall intentions are not even close to one and other.  He also leaves several holes in his argument, failing to point out that organizations like UNICEF and other relief programs also spend money frivolously and there is no way for the donor to ever truly know where their money is going.  The only implication of donating to these foundations is the instant feeling of fulfillment that comes from knowing that you gave an effort to help someone in need.  This is in no way more morally correct then just going about your life spending your money as you please rather than seeing spending money as a selfish act that takes the life of innocent children, which is implied by Singer to the extreme in this essay.