Analysis Of Scott Russell Sanders 'Defending Our Common Wealth'

Individuals seek to make themselves as marketable as possible. The second is that all firms attempt to amplify the amount of money that they make.The author states that “maximizing utility is not synonymous with acting selfishly” (pg.8). He uses the example of the 91-year-old woman who spent her life working as a laundress in Hattiesburg, Mississippi. She lived by herself and owned a black-and-white television with only one channel (pg.8). Before her death, the woman had given $150,000 to the University of Southern Mississippi to endow a scholarship for poor students. The woman derived more utility from saving money and giving it away than spending it on herself. The author talks about how the prices of goods affect everyday life. Most people probably do not realize the effects prices have on us. The author mentions the spike in gas prices in 2008. The high price of gas forced Americans to buy smaller cars. The high price also increased the use of public transportation. It also caused many Americans to switch from cars to motorcycle. This increase in the use of motorcycles in turn raised the number of motorcycle deaths in the U.S. This change in the price of a single item shows the significance that prices play in the lives of

In the “Gospel of wealth”, Andrew Carnegie argues that it is the duty of the wealthy entrepreneur who has amassed a great fortune during their lifetime, to give back to those less fortunate. Greed and selfishness may force some readers to see these arguments as preposterous; however, greed is a key ingredient in successful competition. It forces competitors to perform at a higher level than their peers in hopes of obtaining more money and individual wealth. A capitalist society that allows this wealth to accumulate in the hands of the few might be beneficial to the human race because it could promote competition between companies; it might ensure health care for everyone no matter their social standing, and parks and recreation could

The continuous disparity of wealth and income can cause constant economic problems within a society. Although it is not apparent all the time, there are few benefits of discrepancy itself such as individual wealth, capital, and labor. Both Smith and Carnegie have distinct beliefs about wealth that differentiate from one another, yet are similar in certain ways. Adam Smith confined all his ideas about the common man in his “Wealth of Nations”. Whereas, in the “Gospel of Wealth,” Andrew Carnegie had distinct beliefs about the effects of capitalism . All in all, economic conditions of the 21st century still date back to previous years and signify the importance of economic competition.

In the essay, “The Common Life” by Scott Russell Sanders, Sanders studies the connection between the individual and society. However, this leads to the question, what is the relationship between the individual and society? Individuals and societies may be in opposition but this helps to develop both the individual and society. The decisions that an individual makes reflects on how society views him/her. The overlook of the community can be reverted back to the individual within the society. Society and individuals are a package deal.

Time magazine shows how much popularity and support Sanders has received (“The Gospel” 34). A politician who is not afraid to stand up for what he or she trusts will make this nation grow for the future. Bernie Sanders shows this nation that if freedom and equality is given regardless of what color skin you are, where you come from, or how much money and power you have, will make a better

In today’s capitalist economy, where economic transactions and business in general is centered on self-interest, there is a natural tendency for some people to make more than others. That is the basis for the “American Dream,” where people, if they worked hard, could make money proportional to their effort. However, what happens when this natural occurrence grows disproportional in its allocation of wealth within a society? The resulting issue becomes income inequality. Where a small portion of the population, own the majority of the wealth and the majority of the population own only a fraction of what the rich own. This prominent issue has always been the subject of social tension

In American society, wealth has played a particularly significant role in shaping the culture and standards set for our country. With every dilemma that has occurred, money was been an underlying deciding factor in the end. John.F.Kennedy makes this very clear in his statement on lowering the prices of steel, all the way Jennifer Price's take on people being obsessed with a money, even Scott Russell’s article on the status quo Americans believe determines one's happiness and success. All of these passages tie together to show just how money influences our very own society.

Have you ever wondered what life is like for people in specific social classes and all the baggage that comes with being wealthy? In the article “Amber Waves of Green”, author Jon Ronson has sit downs with hard working americans making a income of $200 a week all the way up to $625,000 a week. In another writing titled “The Mansion”, written by Michael Lewis, allows the reader to get insight on what life is like as a middle class individual taking on a higher style of living. Within the two articles the reader can point out that both Jon Ronson and Michael Lewis disagree on living styles, what wealth can do for you, and how it can affect the people around you.

“Nature is rich; but everywhere man, the heir of nature, is poor.” Lloyd begins his work by complaining about how the rich remain rich and the poor remain poor; however, as the essay progresses, one can see the accuracy of his views. He references the creation of Adam and Eve, stating that, “Never since time began have all the sons and daughters of men been all warm, and filled, and all shod and roofed.” It’s been true throughout history that because of monopolies that a very small percentage of men control a majority of land and resources. Lloyd states that individuals holding a majority of resources and land believe that that there is a scarcity; that there is not enough. And in order to survive, in order to be happy, in order to be prosperous, they must contain and constrain. Men must hold on to any and everything they can get their hands on. The minority has an opposing viewpoint. It feels that there is an abundance of resources, but because of unequal distribution, there is never enough to go around: “There is too much iron, too much lumber, too much flour―for this or that syndicate. The majority have never been able to buy enough of anything; but this minority have too much of everything to sell.” Lloyd concludes by expressing that we have become a “mutual deglutition.” He states that we have advanced too quickly and implicates that we are beginning to reverse

Money is what makes the world go around. From day one, people are assimilated with the idea: to consume, one must spend a medium sufficient enough to receive an object that is desired. Every country has that medium. The Europeans have the Euro, the Japanese have the Yen, Chile has the Peso, and the United States has the Dollar. However, this idea of “getting and spending” has done more harm than good in specific countries. Particularly, in the United States there has been a growing issue of income inequality. The textbook definition of income inequality states: the difference between individuals or populations in the distribution of their assets, wealth, or income. The political problem itself, nevertheless, is deeper and

In his article “Wealth”, Andrew Carnegie argues for the wealth to give back their wealth to the community by providing “public institutions of various kinds … [to] improve the general condition of the people” (Foner 30). Carnegie uses this article to promote his Gospel of Wealth idea and provide his interpretation of the changing America. Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth stated that “those who accumulated money had an obligation to use it to promote the advancement of society” (Foner 28). Carnegie’s articles focuses on the themes of Capitalism and Inequality, which continue to shape society.

“The Gospel of Wealth” was written by Andrew Carnegie in 1889. Carnegie used the essay to “argue that individual capitalists were duty bound to play a broader cultural and social role and thus improve the world,” though there were those that disagreed with him, writing their own share of essays in response and creating a lively debate (History Matters 1). Carnegie, unlike his peers, believed that it was the responsibility of the newly formed upper class, consisting of those who had made their own fortunes, to engage in acts of philanthropy. He believed that the best way to deal with the wealth inequality that resulted from their creation of their own fortunes was to redistribute their wealth in a manner that was not only responsible, but beneficial to all.

In the story of the Rich Official (18: 18-34), Luke tells the story of a young ruler who approached Jesus asking what he needs to do to achieve eternal life. Jesus’ response is “sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven” (18:22). The young official is disheartened by this response as the idea of giving up his wealth left him dejected. After going through his impressive resume of how faithful to the Jewish Law he has been, Jesus remarks that the one thing lacking was giving his wealth to the poor. In this scenario, specific instructions are given to the rich and what it takes to win eternal life; the care for the poor. The rich are expected to share what they have with the poor. This fits perfectly with the teaching of John the Baptist found earlier in the Gospel (3:10-14), “Whoever has two tunics should share with the person who has none. And whoever has food should do likewise”. Luke highlights, as he does throughout the Gospel, the idea that wealth is a significant roadblock on the road to the kingdom of God: it prevents many from doing the will of God. While wealth is not necessarily wrong to have, it might overtake a person who seeks dependence on their wealth.

Community is built of two main elements. First, community requires communal caring. Members need to put themselves in positions where they are able to relate to other members and does everything “within reasonable limits of self-sacrifice” (65). The second is communal reciprocity. Individuals will serve other members of the community, not for exchange of goods, but to provide generosity and support. These elements of community appear in the lives of all individuals, even the most capitalist ones. Humans are entirely capable of these.

With the massive popular support behind such presidential candidates as the businessman Donald Trump and the democratic socialist Bernie Sanders, one must consider why it is that such relatively extreme candidates garnered such mass approval. One view concerning this situation is that a certain dissatisfaction has grown in a vast number of American citizens in regards to how American politics has been operating as of late. With changes in society being viewed as both necessary and slow coming (if at all) under the current administration, one can conclude that there is surely some rational sentiment behind the desire for a presidential candidate that will operate differently than what has been dubbed conventional in politics. Yet, there is also a wealth of rhetoric both from Trump and Sanders which has tended to be vaguer when it comes to the details of implementing plans while instead appealing more to one’s emotions for a positive response. With the popularity that was enjoyed by both candidates, it is clear that fairly large portions of the population are currently rather susceptible to passionate appeals which, in turn, is an indicator that avenues such as social movements could be ripe for being taken once more in America in order to express concerns that are otherwise seemingly falling on deaf ears within the established, conventional political system. This is further highlighted by the claims that it was because of the system in place and power of elites in the system