Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Benjamin franklin's influence
Benjamin Franklin's influence on the nation
What are the contribution of benjamin franklin to the history of the united states
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Benjamin franklin's influence
Truth is told that the economy is done right by spending money wisely in opportunities. Certainly the economy is a way for us to improve our survival and development with a value tension. The value tension is between the private wealth vs the common wealth and as which they shape and benefit a part of the country’s democracy. Private wealth vs common wealth is the effective resource to build a strong system because production, distribution, and benefits occur to create this type of value tension. The private wealth vs the common wealth is a value tension that equally desires to achieve a goal. Private wealth is income, capital, and character, while common wealth is the shared resources from the community. This type of value tension can benefit to “create a healthy tension between what the individual can become and what is necessary to sustain a flourishing community” (Thoreau 24). As this value tension can become a way for people to understand “that their personal well being was intimately connected with the welfare of the community” (Thoreau 24). Benefiting from a certain tension like this can gain the United States to succeed within its people to develop its part of democracy. We have two hands for ourselves and for others who need help therefore wealth can bring an opening path. Certainly no one knew that a man born in Boston known as Benjamin Franklin will bring good to others. Franklin wasn’t as big as …show more content…
Of course the differences pursuit the happiness for the identity, but we can disagree on what the pursuit involves. American’s democracy history created the debate of citizens defining what matters in the economy and therefore creating the debate makes the nation stronger. The conflict between Franklin’s wealth and the common wealth tell us that “yet, we seem to know within the vicissitudes of our own minds that there can be no private wealth without common wealth” (Thoreau
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.
The era that marked the end of civil war and the beginning of the twentieth century in the united states of America was coupled with enormous economic and industrial developments that attracted diverse views and different arguments on what exactly acquisition of wealth implied on the social classes in the society. It was during this time that the Marxist and those who embraced his ideologies came out strongly to argue their position on what industrial revolution should imply in an economic world like America. In fact, there was a rapid rise in the gross national product of the United States between 1874 and 1883. This actually sparked remarkable consequences on the political, social and economic impacts. In fact, the social rejoinder to industrialization had extensive consequences on the American society. This led to the emergence of social reform movements to discourse on the needs of the industrialized society. Various theories were developed to rationalize the widening gap between the rich and the poor. Various reformers like Andrew Carnegie, Henry George and William Graham Sumner perceived the view on the obligation of the wealthy differently. This paper seeks to address on the different views held by these prominent people during this time of historical transformations.
...with the person that refused to use his labor. The appearance of money played an important role in the mankind's evolution. Money, in some ways, inspired men to work harder and harder to claim and enlarge his wealth then one's labor would incite others contribution to the nonstop progression and development of human beings. That one's wealth is estimated upon the combination of their mind and labor, diligence and creativeness, bravery and desires .... has become the formula for our success in this competitive world. Definitely, the inequalities of wealth are natural and inevitable.
One major issue with the nation is their emphasis on the importance of having a timocracy society where power is measured and gained through wealth. A common ideology shared among Americans is “You don’t share things in common; you have your own things” (Burgess 236). Through this statement, Burgess remarks about how American citizens no longer have the will to familiarize themselves with
By using the points listed previously, it is evident that a small portion of the population control what policies are implement in America and hold most of the nation’s wealth. I believe this two factors, the wealth one possesses and the amount of control an individual has, are interconnected. America has become a nation where money can get you anyway because it significantly increases the amount of opportunities available to the individual. Many people can attest to the presence of this class, including individuals from Kansas City who participated in a cross-section study with detailed interviews. The citizens of Kansas City referred to these people as “big rich” or “blue bloods” (pg
The author of the article believes that through the social and productive cooperation, the society can reach its wealth and prosperity. The production cooperation has two main elements, freedom and good health. However, the author emphasizes that freedom is more important than good health and wealth as well. He points out that "the sick people can be productive, but without freedom the productive cooperation of the marketplace is impossible." He also clarified that the rich people could not enjoy their wealth without freedom. Moreover, Professor Dwight mentions that there is mutual dependence among the production and freedom. He clarified this idea in two points. First, "Markets requires freedom". The author attacks the centralized government that prevents the freedom and dominates the information flows, which is an important element of the market economy. Second, "freedom requires markets". Professor Lee emphasizes that privatization protects individual freedom. In this context he mentions for an important example that we might experience in everyday life, "the pollution problems." These are real problems in our world today, especially in the over populated cities and countries such as Mexico City and Cairo.
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.
The Gospel of Wealth is primarily about the dispersion of wealth and the responsibilities of those who have it. Carnegie thinks that inheritance is detrimental to society because it does not do any good for the inheritor or the community. Inheritance promotes laziness and the lack of a good work ethic does not teach the young sons of wealthy men to make money for themselves or help those in community they live in. Carnegie believes that charity is also bad and instead of handouts money should be given to those in a position to help the needy help themselves to be better citizens. It is the responsibility of the wealthy to use their surplus earnings to start foundations for open institutions that will benefit everyone. Men who only leave their money to the public after they are dead which makes it appear to say that if they could take the money with them they would. For this reason Carnegie is in support of Death taxes to encourage men to spend and use their money during their life. Carnegie says in his essay that a definite separation of the classes is productive for society and is very natural. If the classes were to become equal it would be a forced and change thus being revolution and not evolution...
There were many wealthy business owners who believed in the gospel of wealth. This was the idea that God made the rich rich and the poor poor. This was a common thought process of the Guilded Age. Andrew Carnegie was a major follower of this thought. This is shown in his speech “Wealth.” In this speech he says that rich and poor are necessary for the race. It also describes how it is survival of the fittest.
Society today is split in many different ways: the smart and the dumb, the pretty and the ugly, the popular and the awkward, and of course the rich and the poor. This key difference has led to many areas of conflict among the population. The rich and the poor often have different views on issues, and have different problems within their lives. Moral decay and materialism are two issues prevalent among the wealthy, while things such as socio-economic class conflict and the American dream may be more important to those without money. Ethics and responsibilities are an area of thought for both classes, with noblesse oblige leaning more towards the wealthy.
In “The Way to Wealth,” the 1758 essay included in Poor Richard’s Almanac during its first few years of publication, Benjamin Franklin recounts a story whereby locals were gathered outside a merchant auction and complaining of “the badness of the times” to Father Abraham, an elderly man. “‘…[W]hat think you of the times? Will not these heavy taxes quite ruin the country? How shall we ever be able to pay them?”
It is also believed that wealth should be non-existent. This is only possible if cl...
Divisions within the social stratum is a characteristic of societies in various cultures and has been present throughout history. During the middle ages, the medieval feudal system prevailed, characterized by kings and queens reigning over the peasantry. Similarly, in today’s society, corporate feudalism, otherwise known as Capitalism, consists of wealthy elites dominating over the working poor. Class divisions became most evident during America’s Gilded Age and Progressive era, a period in time in which the rich became richer via exploitation of the fruits of labor that the poor persistently toiled to earn. As a result, many Americans grew compelled to ask the question on everyone’s mind: what do the rich owe the poor? According to wealthy
In the “Way to Wealth” by Benjamin Franklin, he illustrates a perspective that is centuries ahead of his time. His insight into the art of being frugal and the need to plan ahead is prevalent. As such, the principles that he lays out for success haven’t changed much in 200 years. One quote that struck me was; “Pride is as loud a beggar as want, and a great deal more saucy!” Pride can be ones downfall especially when that pride is not backed up with drive and ambition. Franklin writes; “Trusting too much to others Care is the ruin of many.” Indeed, trusting in one’s self to accomplish goals is certainly more gratifying. I believe that Franklin is attempting to tell us that too many people over time have attempted to find a shortcut for the way to wealth but only found that it was never really a secret, just a simple approach to an earned lifestyle.
not all have the same amount of wealth, we have the liberty to. We have the