The Father of Modern Philanthropy, Andrew Carnegie, in his article, “Wealth,” describes his views about prosperity and inequality. Carnegie’s views are very much logical considering he was one to come from “rags to riches.” He began by working as a bobbin boy in a cotton mill and soon became a messenger boy in a telegraph office. In addition, Andrew was an enthusiastic reader and expanded his knowledge constantly which led him to become a telegraph operator and later, the superintendent of the Pennsylvania Railroad. Throughout the years, he climbed up the ladder and eventually built the Carnegie Steel Corporation that transformed into the largest steel industrial company in the world. Because of his unfortunate background, Andrew Carnegie grew …show more content…
McDowell describes a boy that lies about his age in order to get a job in the breaker to help contribute to his family. He explains that working in the breaker is not hard, but it is irritating and takes place in a callused environment. The work is repetitive and done within long hours of the day that amounts to little pay. Although the workers are uneducated, they each have a goal of progressing to become a miner granting they may be crushed to death by a falling roof, blown to pieces by a blast, or burned to death by exploding gas. The life of a miner is a never-ending schedule known as a “voluntary life imprisonment,” where few find the way out. Moreover, the article of “Wealth,” and the story about the life of a miner both emphasize on the poor. The fact that most are uneducated and comfortable living in their familiar setting is why the unfortunate have not progressed in the human race. Some may eventually rise up like Andrew Carnegie in his “rags to riches” story and some will stay where they are in a tedious workplace. In contrast, the miner in the story is hardworking; however, that quality does not get him anywhere in life. It may help him progress in the breaker, but it does not contribute to his outside life nor help him obtain