More handpicked essays just for you.
Carnegies justification for the accumulation of wealth
Carnegies justification for the accumulation of wealth
Carnegies justification for the accumulation of wealth
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Greed – the extreme, selfish desire to acquire what is beyond average necessities. Whether greed applies to wealth or power, mankind is prone to exemplify the cupidity. Humans may never become truly content with what they are given, allowing them to desire superfluous objects. The development of greed, as shown in repeated history, eventually leads to the ruination of characters, one particular character being Andrew Carnegie. Andrew Carnegie, the leader of the steel industry in the 19th century, epitomized the concept of greed by yearning for supplementary profits within his company; this greed greatly affected the lives of many, including Carnegie himself.
The captains of industry believed that the poor people were inferior to the rich people. The rich were superior because they had “wisdom, experience, and the ability to administer”. The duty of a rich person was to help out a poor person which was what was said in the Gospel of Wealth. The Gospel of Wealth is about how the rich person's responsibility is philanthropy. Carnegie believes in charity work so he would donate to libraries, and universities and schools and etc.
The “Gospel of Wealth” pushes philanthropic ideas in order to settle the issues of wealth inequality at this time. This document argues that it is the duty of
At the end of the 19th Century, as the United States was experiencing rapid industrialization, a reconfiguration of the social order yielded opposing visions of social progress. Andrew Carnegie, wealthy businessman, and Jane Addams, founder of Chicago’s Hull House, put forward different methods to achieve such progress, where Addams focuses on creating social capital in a seemingly horizontal manner while Carnegie advocates for a top-down approach. While both of them seem to reap a sense of purpose from their attempts to improve the nation, their approaches vary depending on their vision of the composition of the population they want to uplift. First, Carnegie and Addams’ desire to improve society is partly self-serving. For Carnegie, improving society is the role of the wealthy man who, “animated by Christ’s spirit” (“Wealth”), can administer wealth for the community better than it could have for itself (“Wealth”).
Likewise, many wealthy people, including big business leaders, came to realize that it was their role in society was to give back. Due to all the negative responses, people such as Andrew Carnegie were huge philanthropists . They stated that because they were wealthy and were better inclined than most, they should be willing to help those at the bottom. Andrew Carnegie’s, Gospel of Wealth, explicitly stated how the wealthy have a moral obligation to give back (Outside Evidence). Other major responses to changes and the impact of big business were responses from the government.
Carnegie thinks it is better to build public institutions than give charity to the poor because the poor need to have the “desire to improve” and find help in these public institutions. (Carnegie 30). He believes that rather wealthy “Men who continue hoarding great sums all their lives” can find the proper use for their money, which is to help the community. (Carnegie 29). By just giving money to the poor the wealthy are doing all their work and instead the poor should find the assistance they need to improve their lives.
449) In similarity in the ideas of enrichment of land Andrew Carnegie believed that the wealthy were responsible for the public good through decisive disbursement of their riches whether it be through art, parks, or public institutions and that the act of indiscriminate charity was a crutch for society, and that society mustn't stand still or move backwards if it is meant to thrive. Giving back to society through the act of erecting institutes of knowledge was Andrew Carnegies form of wealth and is shown in his use of hyperbolic rhetoric. While building public buildings, libraries and institutions was a form of charity in itself. Mr. Carnegie's goal was to offer the people a place where they could help themselves, and in the process of their growth become great within themselves, so that those people who rose through these public institutions given by him, could then offer in return their part to society instead of being the dreg of society and becoming a
Underpinnings and Effectiveness of Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth” In Andrew Carnegie’s “Gospel of Wealth”, Carnegie proposed a system of which he thought was best to dispose of “surplus wealth” through progress of the nation. Carnegie wanted to create opportunities for people “lift themselves up” rather than directly give money to these people. This was because he considered that giving money to these people would be “improper spending”.
One of the many Gospel of Wealth advocates was Andrew Carnegie, 1835-1919, who was an industrialist who emigrated from Scotland to American in 1848 (Wall, ANBO). Carnegie’s “Wealth” written in 1889
He believed that if the wealthy don't give back some of their profits to the community, they are living a dishonorable life, and although I didn't necessarily agree with this radical viewpoint at first, I now am a firm believer in Carnegie's argument about wealth.
Andrew Carnegie makes it clear that people in society with wealth should help those who deserve the financial help. If those in need of help put in their effort, then why shouldn’t they be helped by those who don’t need it? In the Life of the Average Coal Miner, the harsh conditions that children faced is revealed. Children would work for hours in a crucial and dangerous environment and be rewarded with very little money that did not equal to the amount of work they put in. It is unfair to those who worked in the conditions in the Life of the Average Coal Miner.
But Carnegie did not just hand out bundles of money. The essay says, “In bestowing charity, the main consideration should be to help those who will help themselves,” meaning that, essentially, you should help people so they can help themselves. There is a saying, “If you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day, but teach that man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime.” This was Carnegie’s vision. However, “The Gospel of Wealth” was a biased source.
Andrew Carnegie could have let his employees keep their wages and worry about donations later. Taking money away to invest it somewhere else is not helping, because the people
For instance, Carnegie presented his library named Carnegie Library, he considers this “the best kind of philanthropy” (Ernsberger). By this he indicates the correct way a wealthy individual should live,is by giving back to the community. On the contrary, Richard argues this as negative affect to the company due to the loss of income. Richard believes that Carnegie shouldn’t have spent his money on helping the community instead, he should have continued to invest it on the steel industry. Overall, Richard views Carnegie as “little capitalist who urged presidents to do right things in Philippines, Panama and international diplomacy [but] had never done the right or moral thing as a businessman,” (Ernsberger).
Foremost, "Wealth" written in 1889, by Andrew Carnegie, and “The Life of a Coal Miner” by John McDowell in 1992, both writers have poles apart perspective on social status and on how the economy works; share almost hardly to no comparisons in their philosophy. Carnegie 's views lay on the one base thought that no matter someone’s background they can make success for themselves, while the coal miner essay challenges that by stating “It is an endless routine of dull plodding world from nine years until death—a sort of voluntary life imprisonment. Few escape. Once they begin, they continue to live out their commonplace, low leveled existence, ignoring their daily danger, knowing nothing better.” In the past quote, he explains how the poor are always
