Service to others: values, practices, and social impact

Service to Others

Do the rich have an obligation to help the poor? Further, do wealthy nations have an obligation to aid poorer nations? These are some of the questions that have been floated over time in an attempt to determine whether or not those who have more are obligated to those who have little. This text revisits the debate.

Are we obligated to those who have little?

In my opinion, we who have more have an obligation to help those who are not as fortunate as we are. From the onset, it is important to note that a vast majority of individuals are poor not by choice, but by circumstances. Those who end up being poor may not have had the same opportunities like the rest of us. This is more so the case when it comes to access to education (particularly financial education). In that regard, the rest of us should go out of our way to see to it that we equip those who are poor with the necessary tools in an attempt to uplift them from poverty. For instance, towards this end, we can offer to pass along some financial literacy to those who do not have any. This way, those who are poor would be in a better position to use what they already have to create wealth. Thus instead of writing checks to aid the poor (which is futile in the long-term), we should empower them in a way that enables them to address their needs effectively going forward. By extension, richer nations also have an obligation to empower poorer nations. Indeed, in the opinion of MacKinnon, reducing the wealth gap between poor and rich nations could be in the best interests of wealthier nations (259). To reinforce his assertion, the author in this case gives the example of tree cutting in the Amazon region, which in his opinion is mostly done by poor inhabitants of the region as they amongst other things seek to supplement their meager incomes with charcoal selling. This according to the author occasions significant damage to the environment which ends up affecting the rest of us.

Secondly, in my opinion, it is irrational and insensitive for the rich to continue spending billions of dollars on luxuries as millions across the world continue to suffer. For instance, why would an individual own several luxury cars while another person cannot even afford to settle his or her medical bills? Similarly, why should an individual have billions of dollars lying idle in the bank as scores of people across the world die of hunger? In my opinion, luxury items are insignificant when compared to the basic needs of others including but not limited to food, shelter, and medical attention. In the final analysis, it does not make much sense for one to live in luxury as others wallow in poverty. We therefore have an obligation to give up some of our luxuries so as to help the less fortunate amongst us.