Caliban wrote:

I think it's important to face the reality that there are very real
financial limits to how much good a person can do.

And they should do good with the cats they already own first. After all
they took them in so those cats are their responsibility. I honestly think
if we could get a lot more people to think that way we'd have less of a
problem homing cats. A lot of times the idea of them being disposable and
you can just get another cat cheaper helps with people just giving cats
back to the shelter.

A pet is a responsibility for life, not just a money figure.

If you have a problem with having limits to how much one can spend to save a
cat's life, then welcome to the real world.

I understand that sometimes people can't afford care or even the
consideration of what life left the cat has and how good it would be
compared to how much cost it would be to try to give that amount/quality
of life (for example, "I don't have much money. This cat is going to cost
me 400 dollars to maybe save her/him, no guarentee, and she's 17 years
old."). It sux bigtime, but I can understand it. Sometimes the money just
isn't there.

But, I don't suscribe to the because you can save this many cats with
that money is justification to just put the cat to sleep. That's a
different arguement entirely. That's not I can't afford the care, that
is, the cat is disposable and I can just get another one (or two or
three). Your first responsibility is with the cat you took in for care,
not other cats you haven't agreed to care for yet. That should be what is
focused on, not how many other cats could be adopted with the money.

Alice

--
The root cause of problems is simple overpopulation. People just aren't
worth very much any more, and they know it. Makes 'em testy. ...Bev
|\ _,,,---,,_ Tigress
/,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ http://havoc.gtf.gatech.edu/tigress
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) Cat by Felix Lee.