Andrew Carnegie vs. Henry George

I believe that Carnegie’s views are certainly ethical and that the wealthy must assist the poor if not tons of people can die like the many miners who lived tedious low-level existing lives. The miners had a very poor and unhealthy lifestyle they were covered in ash and dust all the time. The dangers of working in the mines were plenty they may be crushed to death at any giving time by the roof burned by exploding gas or simply blown to pieces by the premature blast. There were so many men and boys that ended up being crippled or dead.

The Gilded Age had many relevant people arguing about economy at that time. Three of the people that argued about economic issues in society are Sumner, Lloyd, and Carnegie. Sumner had a biased approached towards economy in favor of the powerful wealthy class. While Lloyd had a completely contradictory view from Sumner’s opposing most of Sumner’s ideas. On the other hand, Carnegie had a favorable argument for economic equality by offering help to the poor class in his way. Although these authors have opposing views on the economic inequality, they support their views with valid solutions and proposals.

As young as 33, Carnegie was pulling in an annual income of $50,000 a year, a huge amount at that time, and this was enough for him. Carnegie was a firm believer that anyone could make it to the top, and that it was the wealthys’ duty to help the poor work towards a more comfortable life. Carnegie said that “the man who dies rich, dies disgraced.” This is a greedy, unselfish philosophy that a robber baron could not conceive.

Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919) was a major American industrialist in the late 19th century and after obtaining substantial wealth from his steel industry, became an advocate for giving back to the less fortunate. Carnegie’s desire to donate to those less fortunate came from past experiences, growing up as an immigrant and working in a cotton factory young. He knew and understood the hardships that people faced when not able to acquire the type of wealth he rose to earn. Through his long life this atypical businessman advocated for many and dedicated the later years of his life to promoting the general welfare of the world.

Perhaps the most controversial of Andrew Carnegie’s qualities is his belief in Social Darwinism. The English philosopher Herbert Spencer convinced Carnegie that it wasn’t bad to be successful. It was “survival of the fittest” in the business world and there was no reason for Andrew Carnegie to feel guilty for obtaining more wealth. Throughout Carnegie’s life, he displayed his firm belief in the certainty of competition. In fact, he was afraid of competition and did all he could to obstruct or completely remove it when it came to his

Andrew Carnegie was a man who started from nothing and built his way up to find his fortunes in world of steel and factories and after retiring set himself to a life of philanthropy donating his fortunes to the people. This isn’t to say he was an entirely good person however, as his time as a business owner and as an employer. Whether he was a captain of industry or a robber baron is up to your opinions, but I believe he was a true captain of industry.

Carnegie is looking out for the best interests of the rest and his admirable goals are clearly seen from this quote. He puts power in the hands of those who can make a difference with the excess amounts of money given by wealthy men. If inheritances were instead used during life to help the community instead of

Andrew Carnegie. Who was he? Was he just a robber baron or a captain of industry. Andrew was a self made Entrepreneur in the late 1800s. He was the owner of the Carnegie Steel Company which monopolized the steel industry. In 1889 he wrote the famous “Gospel of Wealth” which made the use of libraries to give to the worthy poor that were smart to use them. He also gave away 350 million dollars. On the other side Carnegie’s steel workers were treated poorly by long working hours and reduced wages. He also gave support to the plant manager Henry Frick who hired Pinkerton thugs to intimidate workers on strike and many were killed in the conflict. Andrew Carnegie was sometimes saw as a robber baron taking others money to give away not spending his own money On the other hand people saw him as a captain of industry giving to the worthy poor with libraries and millions of dollars.

2. What, according to Carnegie, is the responsibility of those who receive charity from the wealthy? How does Carnegie differentiate between almsgiving and philanthropy?

Industrialist Andrew Carnegie was born in Dunfermline, Fife, Scotland in November of 1835 to a family of handloom weavers, a group hit remarkably hard by the mechanization of the textile industry. Abandoning the minimal expectations and the now almost invaluable job of weaving in the Scottish industrial cities, Carnegie's family emigrated to the United States in 1848. After years of work and experience in the expansion of the steel industry, Carnegie obtained a general logic of arguments about labor to the broader realm of social relation, giving specific attention to the role of private upper-class wealth in a democratic society.

Dear editor, Carnegie’s Gospel of Wealth can have some valid points about things. One quote Carnegie stated is “In bestowing charity, the main consideration should be to help those who will become themselves” (61-62). He is explaining how if people were to help themselves, then that’s the biggest charity there is because you won’t end up becoming or remaining poor. This in my opinion is true since you have to work hard in life to succeed and it doesn’t come easy. A second point Carnegie made was “we accept and welcome… as conditions to which we must accommodate ourselves” (5-6). He is saying how we as people accept conditions to which we have to work hard for and maintain it and work with other people with that same mindset. I agree because

For Carnegie, there was a need to balance between the individual and fairness in order for society to function correctly. That is to say that those who enjoy the possession of large sums of money shouldn’t just look out for themselves and their own needs or wants at the time to make decisions on how to use their fortune, but instead, should try to use such resources for the benefit of all individuals of society. However, with this Andrew Carnegie didn’t mean that wealth was there to be distributed equally among all men. Instead, he believed that wealthy individuals were superior to the rest of the people and therefore, should be the ones managing surplus earnings since they had the experience and knowledge required which made them more fitted to do the job. According to Carnegie’s idea under this system based on principles and responsibilities, if everyone was to do their part of the job society will continue to experience

Carnegie was a wealthy man himself, but he practiced exactly what he preached. He notices how American society has revolutionized and created the divide between the rich and the poor as it changed. Carnegie compares the American past equality to the equality experienced among the Sioux Indians. Carnegie does not disapprove of the change, but recognizes it as “highly beneficial” (Foner 29). According to Carnegie, the evidence of the changing society is present in the “contrast between the palace of the millionaire and the cottage of the laborer” (Foner 29). Although Carnegie recognizes the divided between rich and poor, he does not see it as a bad thing, nor does he believe that people should stop obtaining wealth. Carnegie believes that the wealthy should use their money to provide for good instead of “hoarding great sums all their lives” (Foner 29). Carnegie approves of the implementation

Andrew Carnegie was a firm believer in idea of individualism. That everyman must work and rise on his own ambition alone, that each man for themselves. In other word, he did not believe in the communist thought of working

Compare And Contrast What Carnegie And Marx Have To Say About Capitalism And Economic Inequality