Originally posted by Real
IF - its not flawed really. Of course itll never get fixed 100%, but does that mean that fixing the puppy problem 100% is equal to even fixing hunger at like 2%? Its a relative ratio here.
IF - its not flawed really. Of course itll never get fixed 100%, but does that mean that fixing the puppy problem 100% is equal to even fixing hunger at like 2%? Its a relative ratio here.
There's no reason people can't devote their time to both. So what if puppy mills are a lower priority than world hunger, poverty, the homeless, etc.? You don't need to just put the time in one to help one or the other. If someone is interested in helping improve puppy mill conditions, then there's no reason why someone should suggest not doing that for the sole reason that there are bigger issues in the world.
I think it would be better if different people put their time in helping improve different issues than everyone focusing on the biggest one.
I also disagree that donating money is a cop out. There will always be people that will actively devote their time in helping causes, but money is always an issue, and tons of well-intentioned organizations don't have enough of it to achieve what they want to. Personally, I would prefer to do what you did as I could see my efforts firsthandedly improving the lives of others. But money is crucial in improving worldwide issues such as these.