ecause perhaps they do not know of the suffering of their fellow humans or they do not feel that such things concern them. Their life is fine. Concerning Hardin's lifeboat analogy, that the rich nations are like the occupants of a crowded lifeboat adrift in a sea full of drowning people. If there is an attempt to save the drowning people by bringing them aboard the boat, the boat will be overloaded and all will perish. Within this theory it is better that some survive then none. In today's world, Hardin's lifeboat ethics suggest that the rich should allow the poor to starve, for if they do not, they will eventually starve along with the poor. The reasoning behind this assessment is, that their are limited amounts of resources. Therefore, Triage Ethics (aid those who will benefit from the assistance) must be imposed. This is because, if the rich nations give to all in need; there will be some countries that will not benefit, but become worse off. This in return, perpetuates absolute poverty rather than alleviating it. Another big point that advocates of this theory make is, the continuation of population growth in these absolute poverty-stricken countries. With the administration of aid to a country in need, the population will grow with the new found resources. This brings about more mouths to feed in an already famine environment. Thus, the cycle would cease to end, and the people of that country would continue to go hungry and die of starvation. Therefore, the rich nations should not perpetuate a hopeless cause, but allow the implementation of triage ethics to consume those who have fallen overboard, so that they may drown within the cesspool of absolute poverty for the sake of population ...
