Conwell's 'Acres Of Diamonds'

Earning money in modern economic is a expression of proficiency and virtue it helps deal with his ethics. His argument is that “more and more money” is not happiness and ultimately it is “absolutely irrational.” Olaudah Equianos and Benjamin Franklin both use their arguments to express their point, however Olaudah uses facts and Benjamin uses his intellect.

In 1879 Henry George wrote an article titled “Progress and Poverty”. In this article he discussed the ongoing industry and he stated that “the wealthy class is becoming more wealthy; but the poorer class is becoming more dependent.

He discusses all that is wrong with the wealthy individuals and how they are spoiled. He makes his argument by revealing how wealth is disposed of, “There are but three modes in which surplus wealth can be disposed of. It can all be left to the families of the descendants; or it can be bequeathed for public purposes; or, finally, it can be administrated during their lives by its possessors” (3). The author is Andrew Carnegie and intended audience is the general public but more specifically are those of wealth and make them conscious of how surplus wealth is disposed of. This is a primary source and reveals that even though this was how the world was a decade ago, it is quite similar and not much has

As a main point of her argument, she argues that poverty is generally stereotyped into the poverty that would only be seen in Africa, or another third world country. To support this, she establishes a sense of ethos for her readers by citing other individuals that have also noticed the poverty representation gap. Seeing that poverty is a complex issue to begin with, George addresses this complexity by simply suggesting that it should be represented as such in the media. Nonprofit charities may now have to reconsider their

According to Russell Conwell's speech "Acres of Diamonds," wealth is accessible to you no matter who or where you are. The term acres of diamonds doesn't literally refer to acres of diamonds, but is a metaphor used to express the belief that opportunities are endless if you just use your resources. You should also be reasonably ambitious to attain your goals. A man's ambition to attain wealth helps to make him a good man. Opportunities surround us in our everyday lives. It's just a matter of being honest, trustworthy, and hard working. Conwell says "Now then, I say again that the opportunity to get rich, to attain unto great wealth, is here in Philadelphia now, within the reach of almost every

Andrew Carnegie’s “The Gospel of Wealth” and Samuel Gompers’ letter to Judge Peter Grosscup offer different opinions concerning the course that people of different economic standings should take in regards to power and social stature. However, both works mean to steer society in what seems to be opposite directions. Carnegie focuses more on how the wealthy in the society should take the seemingly philanthropic approach whereas Gompers’ offers a more organizational and structured point of view.

In Carnegie’s, Wealth, 1889, he shares a similar view with Sumner. Carnegie sees the rich as, “the trustee and agent for his poorer brethren, bringing to their service his superior wisdom, experience, and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would or could for themselves…” (Carnegie, 54). Unlike Sumner, Carnegie believes that the ever widening gap between the rich and poor is a problem and that action should be taken. Carnegie views the poor as almost helpless, unable to provide for themselves and overcome poverty, but he also sees that not all are unable. There are those who are capable of prevailing against the odds and that it is

Wealthy businessmen helped fill the gap between rich and poor by donating much of their profit to those less fortunate. Big businesses during the Industrial Revolution boomed, and as a result, business owners acquired a large profit. Andrew Carnegie was one of the select few large business owners of the Industrial Revolution who gained a significant prophet. He was not only wealthy, but also invested his money for charities and the poor. The ability to give to the poor and to charities was a positive impact from the growth of the upper class. While contributing to the society by setting up free public libraries and other resources, the wealthy did not interfere with the lower classes self preservation and survival. It insured the survival of the fittest while opening opportunities for the less fortunate to grow intellectually and better their chances for future progress (doc

“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

His article “Wealth,” later known as “The Gospel of Wealth,” was published in the North American Review in June of 1889. In his writing, he rejected the traditional goals of charity and depended on less carefully discriminating between the “worthy” and “unworthy” recipients than on attacking the roots causes of inequality/ distribution of wealth themselves. Carnegie believed that wealth should be invested in the useful ventures for the sake of public being rather than using money frivolously and ineffectively. The most fitting view in the fact of having surplus wealth "of the few" becomes the property "of the many,” will help our society become "more elevated,” as Carnegie explains. (Carnegie 2) With such strategies, the wealthy are more willing to give their wealth, while they are alive, rather than have their wealth taken from by taxes when

Andre Carnegie was a poor immigrant who came to the United States in a quest for the realization of the American Dream. A self-started entrepreneur who through hard work and by taking advantage of the right opportunities was able to develop an enormous wealth, signifying with it, the definite possibility of social mobility. In his essay “Wealth” of 1989 Carnegie refers to the importance of the distribution of wealth and how such fortune was there to be used by the rich for the benefit and well-being of all individuals of society. Throughout this essay I will be explaining the arguments for the redistribution of wealth made by Carnegie, while analyzing as well the factors that may have motivated him to write his famous essay “Wealth.”

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.

Nonetheless, the third mode is which Carnegie beckons as the start of a great evolutional growth in the distribution of wealth amongst classes. Carnegie believes that the rich must supply the poor with not money directly to their pockets, which would coax temptations. Rather, the rich must supply the less fortunate with the means to grow as people, to heighten ambitions, and raise the level of class. This is done through, for example, the construction of a public library. Carnegie, in fact, tells a tale of Mr. Tilden. Mr. Tilden, a wealthy man, builds a large public library in New York City. This distributes more than a couple quarters could ever, the ability for any man to enhance his learning and opportunities for free.

Like Winthrop, Russell Conwell, author of Acres of Diamonds, stresses how great America is with emphasis that it somehow ordained from a higher power. However, Winthrop focuses maintaining this status through unselfish means while Conwell uses this as a way to establish individual success. “There never was a place on earth more adapted than the city of Philadelphia to-day, and never in the history of the world did a poor man without capital have such an opportunity . . . Because to make money honestly is to preach the gospel” (Conwell, 179). His argument that Philadelphia is the greatest city on earth ties in with the concept of American exceptionalism. The connection he makes with religion is contrasted to Winthrop since Winthrop argues that America will lose its exceptionality if it does not avoid selfish actions. Conwell argues that God is placing America in such a place that every person has the ability to acquire individual wealth. Though Conwell focuses on the city of Philadelphia, his arguments can be applied to a more general sense in America. His statement that

Another theory that relates to poverty is the conflict theory. Conflict theory is a paradigm that sees social conflict as the basis of society and social change and emphasizes a materialistic view of society, a critical view of the status quo, and a dynamic model of historical change (Ferris & Stein, 2008, 2010). The theory was originally brought on by Karl Marx, and was later adapted and further developed by other theorists; for example, Max Weber. Looking at poverty through the lens of the conflict theory, we