I think you have to look at utilitarianism in a question of, “What does the best good for the greatest amount of people that is both effective and efficient?” That means that sacrifice may be a means to an end in order to achieve that greatest good for the greatest amount of people. The sacrifice is that actions that disproportionately disadvantage, objectify, or exploit people should not be taken. Those that benefit the greatest number should. Utilitarianism is all about greatest good. I don’t think moral decisions have much place anywhere outside of what harms people. I don’t think there is a moral element of utilitarianism but rather it has to do with the greatest good question. If we lived in a world where the ills were solved by that question I do not know that we would want to live in that world because it would mean the whole of humanity would exist on very little seeing as there are so many of us and much of the global economy is predicated on developed nations raping the undeveloped nations for resources, talent, and wealth. Utilitarianism by its very nature lowers all boats to a certain common stand and only raises boats when all boats can be raised which is not very often. It is a good survival strategy but may be not something to thrive on beyond survival plus some culture and a small amount of leisure.
I think you have to look at utilitarianism in a question of, “What does the best good for the greatest amount of people that is both effective and efficient?” That means that sacrifice may be a means to an end in order to achieve that greatest good for the greatest amount of people. The sacrifice is that actions that disproportionately disadvantage, objectify, or exploit people should not be taken. Those that benefit the greatest number should. Utilitarianism is all about greatest good. I don’t think moral decisions have much place anywhere outside of what harms people. I don’t think there is a moral element of utilitarianism but rather it has to do with the greatest good question. If we lived in a world where the ills were solved by that question I do not know that we would want to live in that world because it would mean the whole of humanity would exist on very little seeing as there are so many of us and much of the global economy is predicated on developed nations raping the undeveloped nations for resources, talent, and wealth. Utilitarianism by its very nature lowers all boats to a certain common stand and only raises boats when all boats can be raised which is not very often. It is a good survival strategy but may be not something to thrive on beyond survival plus some culture and a small amount of leisure.