In lifeboat ethics the case against the poor what is the author's main argument

In the book "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping the Poor," the author presents an argument that is likely to be controversial for most people. The author tells us that he believes it is not necessary or even good to help the poor. However, the author also provides justification for his proposition. He tells us that foreign aid often brings more problems than solutions. He also believes that many problems poor countries face are not going to be solved by having more money, but by having better education and institutions.

Answer and explanation:

Garret Hardin, the author of "Lifeboat Ethics", does not believe equality in sharing the planet's resources could be easily achieved as the environmentalists do.

"Lifeboat Ethics" is an essay published in 1974 in which Hardin discusses how wrong he thinks environmentalists are when they compare our planet to a spaceship. According to the author, environmentalists are too idealistic when they claim that no person or institution has the right to destroy, waste, or use more than a fair share of the "spaceship's" resources, since we all live in it.

Hardin compares our planet's countries to lifeboats, the rich countries being the lifeboats full of rich people, the poor countries being the poor people swimming in the ocean - that comparison comes from the known fact that, when ships sank, rich people were prioritized to be saved. A poor person would want to climb into a lifeboat, but there is a lot to be taken into consideration before allowing them to do so, such as the lifeboat's capacity. That metaphor means that simply lending a hand and helping out can be damaging to the one helping. Thus, international aid must be done with due caution. Hardin defends the idea that a rich country must think of its own economy and situation first, prioritizing its own survival.