The Island Of Plenty Johnson Montgomery Analysis
Share Your Plenty
Helping out suffering countries around the world is the right thing to do. "The Island of
Plenty" by Johnson Montgomery explains what he thinks would become of mankind if the
United States helped people in suffering countries. Montgomery was born in the year 1934, and grew to become a California attorney after attending Harvard University and Stanford University
Law School. Montgomery is wrong because his article states that the United States should have a
‘blind eye’ to worldwide sufferers so that we can keep ourselves fed. Montgomery is a hypocrite, he believes that the resources that America has are limited and should be kept for ourselves and for the sake of our future generations, even though the U.S. relies on other countries just as much …show more content…
According to author Patrick James, the U.S. alone consumes enough resources to supply 4.1 Earth’s, but us Americans are too caught up in on our own needs to stop and really think about how life might be like for them, how it might feel to struggle. Yes, people have sympathy for those in poverty when we do think about their situation but realistically, people are glad it isn’t their situation.
When we are born into this world, no one has the option to choose which country or family they will be raised in. No one has a choice and that is why us
American’s shouldn’t be so stingy about the resources America has, because we could’ve been born in a third world country living in a dirt home, starving for a piece of bread, and a drop of water to hold over our thirst. It isn’t fair.
Montgomery is incorrect. If Americans were in their position right now, people would be expecting developed countries to help out. America isn’t struggling or lacking as many resources as Southeast Asia, India, and Africa are. We are capable of sharing food, water, medicine, etc.
It’s terrible letting people in third world countries suffer when America can do well for them.
We can save
Helping out suffering countries around the world is the right thing to do. "The Island of
Plenty" by Johnson Montgomery explains what he thinks would become of mankind if the
United States helped people in suffering countries. Montgomery was born in the year 1934, and grew to become a California attorney after attending Harvard University and Stanford University
Law School. Montgomery is wrong because his article states that the United States should have a
‘blind eye’ to worldwide sufferers so that we can keep ourselves fed. Montgomery is a hypocrite, he believes that the resources that America has are limited and should be kept for ourselves and for the sake of our future generations, even though the U.S. relies on other countries just as much …show more content…
According to author Patrick James, the U.S. alone consumes enough resources to supply 4.1 Earth’s, but us Americans are too caught up in on our own needs to stop and really think about how life might be like for them, how it might feel to struggle. Yes, people have sympathy for those in poverty when we do think about their situation but realistically, people are glad it isn’t their situation.
When we are born into this world, no one has the option to choose which country or family they will be raised in. No one has a choice and that is why us
American’s shouldn’t be so stingy about the resources America has, because we could’ve been born in a third world country living in a dirt home, starving for a piece of bread, and a drop of water to hold over our thirst. It isn’t fair.
Montgomery is incorrect. If Americans were in their position right now, people would be expecting developed countries to help out. America isn’t struggling or lacking as many resources as Southeast Asia, India, and Africa are. We are capable of sharing food, water, medicine, etc.
It’s terrible letting people in third world countries suffer when America can do well for them.
We can save