The author of "The Singers' Solution to Global Poverty" advocates that American citizens donate the majority of their disposable income in order to end global suffering. Peter Singer makes many assumptions in his proposal about global poverty, and they are based on the premise that Americans are spending too much money on items and services they don't need. Singer uses extreme methods to achieve his goal of getting readers to truly believe in his ideas and change their values ​​and way of life. He uses an informal, conversational tone in this article and demonstrates his point of view in an emotional way by giving several illustrations. The author's main point is that it is morally wrong for wealthy people to spend money on unnecessary things like restaurants and vacations while children suffer in other countries. The use of this emphasizes that the author believes in moralistic and compassionate values. Additionally, the author is sometimes too forceful in telling the reader what to do. Since he uses such an emotional and forceful tone in the article, it is doubtful whether Singer will succeed in convincing the public of his point of view on this issue. He may have convinced many people to donate a certain amount of money to charity for poor countries, but his article is not effective enough to convince me. All human beings have the right to have luxury items, even if many would say they do so to the detriment of their morality. In a hypothetical situation, Singer describes a man named Bob and his love for his uninsured Bugatti. Bob has just used most of his nest egg on an extremely valuable classic automobile. He loves his car not just because he loves driving...... middle of paper ...... Another weakness of Singer's article is the aggressive language he uses throughout his writing to influence the reader. For example, his use of forceful dialogue encourages people to donate money in the following statement: Telling the reader what to do is not an effective way to convince an audience to make a contribution. Singer's argument may have convinced many people to donate their disposable income. to children in need, despite its many fundamental flaws. He argues that we should give the majority of our income to charity. Since Singer wants the reader to donate such a large amount of money, readers have no choice but to contribute nothing at all. His solution is not realistic and does not take into account the long-term financial impact that this type of donation contribution system would have on a country's economy..