Do the wealthy have a moral obligation to help the poor?

Many maintain that the citizens of rich nations have a moral obligation to aid poor nations. First, some have argued, all persons have a moral obligation to prevent harm when doing so would not cause comparable harm to themselves. Thus, they conclude, people in rich nations have a moral obligation to aid poor nations.

Are rich people obligated to help?

From the shoes to the watch, the belt to the ring, bag to wallet, he wore extremely expensive stuff. Life has been good, he told me. We are a lucky generation that worked when India transitioned to a market economy and provided immense opportunities for career and entrepreneurship.

Are rich people more moral?

No. But, according to a string of new studies, it’s not clear if being rich increases unethical behavior or if such behavior is what allows people to become rich in the first place. According to a new study, poor people are more likely to act ethically than the wealthy.

What is the moral obligation of the rich to the poor?

The obligation of the rich to give to the poor is a moral one, that should arise from charity and a love of mankind but, with equal effect, could arise from vested self-interest and, in the absence of voluntary financial fair play, should be enforced through taxation.

What is the difference between self interest and society’s obligation to wealth?

The apparatus by which people earn wealth was built by society, and people who choose to live in society are obligated to it, not to themselves. As for self interest… the wealthy are wealthy because others trade with them. The poor, for the most part, are not poor willingly or for lack of trying to get ahead.

Why should the rich help the poor?

Anyway, the point is, there’s a good, practical reason why the rich should help the poor – because if they don’t, the poor will help themselves (there will be a revolution), and the rich will suffer a lot more in the process. Is this still revelant? Give me your car. @gotc147 Then you would have a car and I wouldn’t – that’s not how sharing works.

Is it morally reprehensible to ignore the plight of starving people?

Someone wrote these words: “To ignore the plight of starving people is as morally reprehensible as failing to save a child drowning in a pool because of the inconvenience of getting one’s clothes wet.” I want to raise a question for discussion: Do wealthy people have a moral obligation to help the poor?