Singer Solution to World Poverty

I think that this paper raises some good points but there are a lot of things that I don't agree with. Some of the accusations against both the people in the examples and the reader are unfair. A lot of it is true, like how we sometimes spend money on things we don't need, but some points in he paper are kind of unrealistic.
In the first example, with Dora, I definitely think it is unfair to say that it was her fault for giving the kid up for adoption. It's not like she knew what was going to happen. Of course, doing a little research first wouldn't have hurt, but the possible harm that could have befallen that child was unintentional. I think that Bob's story is different. When we donate money to a cause, we don't actually know what's happening to it. Bob knew exactly what would happen if he didn't pull the switch. It's hard to just give away money and believe that somewhere, a kid's life was saved. If I was Bob, I know I certainly wouldn't be able to enjoy my car knowing that I had it because someone's family was mourning for the loss of their child.
As I said, I agree with Singer when he said that we spend more money than we need to on things we don't need. Yes, we could buy the cheaper car and donate the saved money. But where do we stop? Maybe we shouldn't buy a car at all. Maybe he's suggesting we just stay home all the time and not go anywhere so that we never spend money on anything, because it would help other people. If we do donate $200 and it saves a child, the child next to it is still not saved. Are we responsible for that one’s life too? Eventually, it will come to the point where we should spend less money on food and skip meals because we will still live if we skip a meal, whereas some starving child in a third-world country will not. I’d like to know how often Mr. Singer goes out to nice dinners, or how much he really needed his car. Does he donate absolutely everything he has to spare to charity?
Singer’s excuse for his behavior is that he is a “utilitarian philosopher… that is, one who judges whether acts are right or wrong by their consequences.” I don’t think that it is anyone’s place to judge what is right and what is wrong. Anything could have a bad consequence, but that doesn’t mean the person who caused it is a terrible person. He seems to think that this is a noble profession, the judging of fellow human beings, but I disagree.
I agree with a lot of the main ideas in this paper, it’s just in the details where things don’t really work for me. I think it’s unfair to say that someone who goes on a nice vacation every once in a while is the same as someone who lets a child die on train tracks so that they can save their car. However, after all the things I disagreed with, this is a very persuasive paper, and if it convinced anyone to donate money to a worthy cause, I can only support it.