Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The gospel of wealth carnegie views
The gospel of wealth carnegie views
The gospel of wealth carnegie views
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The gospel of wealth carnegie views
Andrew carneige was a poor scottish immigrant who came to America at a young age. During the nineteenth century Carnegie helped build America's steel company. Which help a poor scottish immigrant turn into the riches man of america. Growing up being poor Carneige understood the struggle of making ends meet and it influenced his viewpoints on wealth in America. Retiring at the age of sixty-six Carneige had a lot of wealth , he decided he would become a philanthropist, someone who gave away money for good causes. In contrast, there was William Sumner who had a different take on the wealth and classes of America. Sumner grew up in America , on the East Coast and he saw things different than Andrew Carnegie. Sumner believed that the rich had …show more content…
Known for his contributions he devotes his earnings to making America a better place for all to live. However, he is very strict on how these contributions should be made. He believes all disruption should be made when the millionaire is alive. That after the millionaires death his contribution does nothing to benefit the society. “The miser millionaire who hoards his wealth does less injury to society than the careless millionaire who squanders his unwisely, even if he does so under cover of the mantle of sacred charity,” (p. 32) In some degree I agree with him. What does it say when contribution is made after someone death? Personally, it says that the cause wasn't important enough and now that the millionaires dead, they try to make it seem like they care and still keep their name on the radar by donating to society. Carnegie saw wealth as something that a person had to work for, and as a constant battle to maintain. Carnegie came from a poor family and worked hard to achieve his wealth.I began to learn what poverty meant," Andrew would later write. "It was burnt into my heart then that my father had to beg for work. And then and there came the resolve that I would cure that when I got to be a man." Also he said that he felt that he was given an opportunity when he was young and felt it was his duty to give others the means to be successful as well. This is important to Carnegie as someone who does come from struggling background; he doesn’t want to see the inequalities that are created in America due to a number of many factors. He wants to see society as a whole
He explained that they had the responsibility to be philanthropic and donate their wealth to benefit society while they are living. If the wealthy keep their riches until they are dead, then it simply implies that the deceased would have wanted to bring the money with them if it were possible. Carnegie also explained that family members should not leave each other inheritances. By leaving them with a large amount of money, it gives family members no motivation to work hard; becoming lackadaisical. He wrote how one should contribute to society through charity, by donating towards a physical cause; and not by giving money to a homeless person.
Tobias Wolff’s “The Rich Brother” is a story of two brothers, Donald and Pete. These brothers have very contrasting lifestyles; Pete is a successful businessman with a wife and kids. Donald, on the other hand, is an outcast. He’s unemployed and irresponsible. He lives his life as a vagabond. Despite these facts, the successful brother, Pete, still lacks the self-esteem he desperately craves. Therefore he tries to make his brother, Donald, feel foolish with every chance he gets.
In my opinion Carnegie is a truly a hero. Today we don’t see a lot of men giving their money away when they die. Carnegie did change many lives for the better, and he did help save lives as well. In Document B Carnegie would word how the wealthy would never do anything with their money for the better, he didn’t want to became one of them. Carnegie quote was “ The man who dies rich dies disgraced”, by that he means why would you all that money go to waste, you are going to be died, that money could help save many lives that is why he was one who changed
In Tobias Wolff’s 1985 short story “The Rich Brother,” we are introduced to two brothers. According to Wolf, you cannot even tell that they are brothers because of their physical differences, but as the story goes into more detail we can tell that they are different in every aspect. One of the major differences is that one is wealthy and the other is always in need of financial assistance. The older brother, Pete, is a successful real estate agent while his younger brother, Donald, works as a painter whenever he can. The two brothers are very different in their belief about what is valuable. Pete is a man that has worked hard and values what he has acquired. His brother Donald, on the other hand, values sharing whatever he has. Even if giving everything he has leaves him with nothing.
Andrew Carnegie, was a strong-minded man who believed in equal distribution and different forms to manage wealth. One of the methods he suggested was to tax revenues to help out the public. He believed in successors enriching society by paying taxes and death taxes. Carnegie’s view did not surprise me because it was the only form people could not unequally distribute their wealth amongst the public, and the mediocre American economy. Therefore, taxations would lead to many more advances in the American economy and for public purposes.
William Graham Sumner came from a hard working family. He grew up in the environment where he was taught to respect Protestant economic virtues. Hard work and efficiently utilizing money leads to the result in success. After reading, Illustration of Political Economy written by Harriet Marti he became aware of the wage fund doctrine, and other theories associated with that. His understanding of capital, labor, money and trade were based upon the book, Illustration of Political Economy. He published books like Earth hunger, The Absurd Effort to Make the World Over, The Forgotten Man, Folkways and others. His intellectual ideas were passed through the columns of popular journals and from the lecture platform, he waged a holy war against reformism, protectionism, socialism, and government interventionism.
Steel Company after a serious, bloody union strike.He saw himself as a hero of working people, yet he crushed their unions. The richest man in the world, he railed against privilege. A generous philanthropist, he slashed the wages of the workers who made him rich. By this time, Carnegie was an established, successful millionaire. He was a great philanthropist, donating over $350 million dollars to public causes, opening libraries, money for teachers, and funds to support peace.
...interpretations of their assumption of millions of dollars. Due to their appropriation of godlike fortunes, and numerous contributions to American society, they simultaneously displayed qualities of both aforementioned labels. Therefore, whether it be Vanderbilt’s greed, Rockefeller’s philanthropy, or Carnegie’s social Darwinist world view, such men were, quite unarguably, concurrently forces of immense good and evil: building up the modern American economy, through monopolistic trusts and exploitative measures, all the while developing unprecedented affluence. Simply, the captains of late 19th century industry were neither wholly “robber barons” or “industrial statesmen”, but rather both, as they proved to be indifferent to their “lesser man” in their quests for profit, while also helping to organize industry and ultimately, greatly improve modern American society.
...ve up the fortunes they have built themselves. It is an admirable idea to give your money to help promote a thriving community. Carnegie states that he is against charity and believes that those in need should be taught how to improve their own lives. To fund these institutes and corporations a form of charity must be given. Wealthy citizens give their excess money to a few to disperse of in a way they see fit to help the race. Most Americans are not willing to give up such a large sum of money as noble and respectable of an idea as it is. I think that Carnegie’s plan, in theory, would work and would be best for the race. I do not think it is practical because most would rather spoil their own family with inheritance than give it away to help people unknown to them. Carnegie’s idea of fair is equal opportunities for everyone to help themselves and the race.
Document M gives us quotes from Andrew Carnegie’s, “Wealth” in the North American Review, June 1889. He states that he wanted more than just the wealthy to prosper: “The man who dies rich is a disgrace.” He was one of those men who would leave their wealth for public use on his deathbed. He never spent too much of his money because he wanted to “set an example of modest... living…; and… to consider all surplus revenues… as trust funds;” he’s a little bit of a hypocrite. Carnegie’s ideas are criticised for the mistakes along the way, but when his ideas came to be, they made big impacts all around the
Also, they both understand the importance of the competition of man and how it affects wealth and poverty. The reasoning that can attribute to their similarities and differences is their profession. Carnegie is a renowned industrialist known for his steel industry. Being an industrialist he understands the importance of contribution to society which is why he propagates the significance of the wealthy helping the poor. On the other hand, Sumner was a “professor of political economy at Yale University” (textbook, 488), and his profession correlates to why he advocates the idea that social darwinism can positively affect a capitalist
Carnegie, a Scottish immigrant, was the second richest man at the time but unlike other high-class people of his time he believed that the divide between the poor and wealthy needed to be smaller. Carnegie, unlike most in his position at the time, is actually expressing his want for more change, the improvement of social gaps, this makes him an outlier of the time . He describes America in the industrial revolution as very similar to England in the way of the effect of the Revolution. With little to no opportunities to gain wealth, the working class suffered through poor sanitation, bad working conditions, and limited food, factories taking over the country's workforce. In the article, Carnegie describes the changes of the human way of life over the past hundred years observing the revolutionization of the world. This source helps us understand the vast difference of the poor versus rich living conditions and the way the industrial revolution is affecting society. Although he mentions the changing living conditions, he also implies the moral shift that was
Even though these men attempted to build a stable foundation for America to grow on, their negative aspects dramatically outweighed the positive. Even though Andrew Carnegie donated his fortunes to charity, he only acquired the money through unjustifiable actions. As these industrialists continued to monopolize companies through illegal actions, plutocracy- government controlled by the wealthy, took control of the Constitution. Sequentially, they used their power to prevent controls by state legislatures. These circumstances effect the way one
A penny saved may be a penny earned, just as a penny spent may begin to better the world. Andrew Carnegie, a man known for his wealth, certainly knew the value of a dollar. His successful business ventures in the railroad industry, steel business, and in communications earned him his multimillion-dollar fortune. Much the opposite of greedy, Carnegie made sure he had what he needed to live a comfortable life, and put what remained of his fortune toward assistance for the general public and the betterment of their communities. He stressed the idea that generosity is superior to arrogance. Carnegie believes that for the wealthy to be generous to their community, rather than live an ostentatious lifestyle proves that they are truly rich in wealth and in heart. He also emphasized that money is most powerful in the hands of the earner, and not anyone else. In his retirement, Carnegie not only spent a great deal of time enriching his life by giving back; but also often wrote about business, money, and his stance on the importance of world peace. His essay “Wealth” presents what he believes are three common ways in which the wealthy typically distribute their money throughout their life and after death. Throughout his essay “Wealth”, Andrew Carnegie appeals to logos as he defines “rich” as having a great deal of wealth not only in materialistic terms, but also in leading an active philanthropic lifestyle. He solidifies this definition in his appeals to ethos and pathos with an emphasis on the rewards of philanthropy to the mind and body.
A wealthy person, with the desire to do well with their fortune, could benefit society in a number of ways. Carnegie has verbally laid a blueprint for the wealthy to build from. His message is simple: Work hard and you will have results; educate yourself, live a meaningful life, and bestow upon others the magnificent jewels life has to offer. He stresses the importance of doing charity during one’s lifetime, and states “…the man who dies leaving behind him millions of available wealth, which was his to administer during life, will pass away ‘unwept, unhonored, and unsung’…” (401). He is saying a wealthy person, with millions at their disposal, should spend their money on the betterment of society, during their lifetime, because it will benefit us all as a race.