Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Carnegie's view on the distribution of wealth
Wealth inequality in the society
Income and wealth inequality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Carnegie's view on the distribution of wealth
Wealth inequality in the society
Income and wealth inequality
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Carnegie's view on the distribution of wealth
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.
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”).
Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth, provides considerable insight into his beliefs, specifically highlighting his opinion about rich people and their wealth after death. Following his ideas brings forth the question: Was Andrew Carnegie opposed to estate taxes on the rich at the time of their death? His point of view allows the assumption that he is not in aversion to estate taxes. Andrew Carnegie's Gospel of Wealth, provides considerable insight into his beliefs, specifically highlighting his opinion about rich people and their wealth after death. Following his ideas brings forth the question: Was Andrew Carnegie opposed to estate taxes on the rich at the time of their death?
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.
Philanthropists who believed in Social Darwinism, such as Carnegie, a wealthy person who had control of the oil industry, were able to fund libraries, concert halls, and schools for the American lower class. This concept, known as the Gospel of Life, is also exemplified in Document 5, which claims that large amounts of wealth in individuals should only be considered bad if it is used in a wrong way (Doc 5). The purpose of this document is important because it argues that the wealth disparity isn't necessarily bad and could be helpful to American society. Although all this may have benefited some, it
“The man who dies thus rich dies disgraced.” This is a famous quote from Carnegie, expressing his attitude towards wealth. Back in Carnegie’s time, property was an issue to the majority of people and thus was considered important; however, when Galbraith wrote his essay, poverty became a minor social issue and received less political attention. Their different historical background and perspective result in different opinions on wealth and poverty. Galbraith would criticize Carnegie’s idea of the Law of Competition, ways to aid, and responsibility and ability of helping the poor.
“The Gospel of Wealth” was written by Andrew Carnegie discusses the expansion era of industries post civil war, a time that produced extremely large wealth for many business at the time. Andrew Carnegie, was one of the top guys in the industry, he created an industry that made Carnegie very successful at the time. Carnegie thought that it was important for wealthy people to distribute their wealth throughout the society so communities in need will receive help. In the Gospel of Wealth he believes that the conditions of society have radically changed over the years, and it was certain that some people would become quite important and wealthy. He believes that the change that is occurring should be looked at a positive perspective and not in
Carnegie, who was a believer of Social darwinism, which was a belief held by many that stated that the rich were rich and the poor were poor due to natural selection in society. This was the basis of many people who promoted a laissez faire style of economy. He believed if you worked hard, you could be successful. He believed that a man of wealth should set modest examples and help those in need (DOC E) Carnegie donated more than 150 billion of dollars for libraries, colleges and concert halls. The high population density of the early twentieth century put pressure on fragile infrastructures and demanded insight from urban planners and politicians.
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”.
Carnegie, Conwell, and Alger Advocates of Wealth for All During the late nineteenth century, a form of Social Darwinism emerged called the Gospel of Wealth also known as the Success Gospel. Social Darwinism is “Herbert Spencer’s adaptation of Charles Darwin’s concepts of natural selection and “survival of the fittest” as it applies to human society” (Nash p. 417). Social Darwinists believed that the social order was the product of the natural selection of the individuals that were best suited for the existing living conditions. These individuals were white, Anglo-Saxon, wealthy men.
2.The three of these platforms have a wide range of views on poverty and the best course of action to eliminate poverty for good or at least get people on their feet. For starters, The gospel of Wealth written by Andrew Carnegie takes the viewpoint of the Wealthiest men in America. In his writings, he makes sure to explain that the reason that people are homeless and on the street is because they lack a good work ethic. The wealthy men are, “skilled and intelligent,” and view that being in “Poverty is a kind of character flaw.” Though he clearly does not feel sorry for these people because he believes it is deserved, the main point of the gospel is that the Wealthy should give back to the people.
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.
Their admirers argued that they were captains of industry who built the core american industrial economy. For example, Carnegie donated more than 90 percent of his fortune and said that philanthropy was an upper class duty the “Gospel of Wealth”. Rockefeller donated more than $500 million to various charities, slightly more than half his entire net worth. Gilded Age politics called the “ Third Party System”, featured very closed contest between the republicans and democrats. Progressivism was caused by the gilded age.
His business practices also reflected this level of lack of concern for other people that later transformed into regret and attempts at redressing his wrongs. First-hand observers of his factories, specifically Hamlin Garland, said the noises produced by the machines were as loud and frightening as a lion’s roar and that the entire factory was filled with an awful stench, furthermore, the workers were likened to men going to war for the sake of their wives and children while only receiving a mere 14 cents an hour. Originally when the union rejected Carnegie’s attempt at lowering of wages, Carnegie greeted them sympathetically and amacibly receiving exactly what he wanted, the unions were silenced and he was viewed as a benevolent employer. Making attempts to be remembered as this person, he saw it necessary to use his money for the public good which would later be outlined in his book, the Gospel of Wealth. The preservation of this public image was successful, but behind the scenes, Carnegie was less sympathetic towards his employees and their