For Singer, the human community must receive justice, not simply a society setting its own local standards of morality and justice, as in Mill's argument. For Singer there are no 'imperfect' obligations, rather all obligations are absolute. Someone who merely does no harm to others, or extends help only to family members and his or her immediate community is committing a moral wrong. Even someone who is 'good' but spends his or her money on flat screen TVs rather than on aid to starving children is immoral. Singer's philosophy is useful to contrast with that of Mill's attempt to justify the moral nature of utilitarianism, because it clearly supports the...

Mill's less idealistic, but seemingly more reasonable and realistic idea of allowing for the 'greatest good' in most instances, while still protecting the rights of the majority and balancing emotional needs for retribution and also compassion with practical concerns, seems in line with what is deployed by most functional democratic governments. (1, 479 words).
References

Mill, John Stuart. (1865). Chapter 5. Utilitarianism.

Singer, Peter. (1999, September 5). The Singer solution to world poverty. The New York Times.