Do people of the Western, developed world have any moral obligation to help or even share their wealth the the poorer people in the Third World? Should we do more or do you think we do enough already?

Discuss.

I think that's an important question, but why not take care of the starving people at home first?

Great question
I think that we should help them and that would help the world be a better place.......and e could all live in harmony.
Joking

Morally, sure.
Trouble is, look around. And I'm not talking about current events. All in all, Western civilization has lots of problems: waste, excess, decadence and poverty at the same time.
Nowadays we've got no more money. China needs to cut our lifeline so we can figure out how to live together as mutually happy as possible, using what's left of our own resources so we don't squander the rest of the world's.

I feel Australia helps them enough by taking them in by the boatload (literally) and letting them sponge off welfare.

I think we do tooo much! Not saying we shouldn't do
some of the stuff that we're doing, all for a good cause
-- but ... have to take care of ourselves too. News tonight is saying in spite of all the stimulus packages,
unemployment rates are skyrocketing! People can't afford health insurance as it is now, and we keep spending millions outside of USofA.

Morally, maybe, obligation, probably not. As much as I'd like to help every nation in the world, it's just not feasibly possible. The US (and the UK) is in enough trouble, financially, that I don't see us being of any benefit to any other country.

Besides, if western civilization interfered with third world countries, we'd more than likely interfere with their culture, and I sort of draw the line at that. It's not our place to tell them what is right and wrong. Though our ways may work and theirs not. Our history of interfering haven't been all that "tactful".

Until the developing world can implement some semblence of democracy .. some sort of reasonable standard of honesty .. what the 'west' already give them shold not be increased.

Curb corruption, invest what they already have in benefiting their own population .. then I can advocate giving more.

But surely if we helped more they wouldn't 'come by the boatload'? And aren't people too poor to afford to eat with next to no medical care at all more needy than people who can't afford health insurance?

I'm not trying to take sides just pointing it out.