Gospel Of Wealth Analysis

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.

“An obsession with possessions enslaves us to the demon of worry. Jesus invites us to change our priorities, focus on the kingdom, and share with the needy” (Kraybill, 2011, p.101). A man’s wealth will be measured by the love, kindness and empathy he has for the poor and the hungry in Gods kingdom. For this matter Jesus wants the wealthy to humble themselves and receive their blessing by offering opportunities to the poor instead of being greedy and celebrating their own wealth.

Social classes have different standards of living. By properly administering wealth, Carnegie becomes the trustee of his poorer brethren’s funds. He believes the wealthy man, with his superior knowledge and experience in financial matters, is better suited to administer these funds. Carnegie says he would be “doing for them better than they would or could for themselves” (399). A wealthy person could buy a few acres of land, build a hospital, and create a hundred jobs in the hospital while creating affordable or free health care. The wealthy do not have to worry about how much it would cost if they were diagnosed with pneumonia. They simply take the diagnosis, pay for the treatment, and move on with their lives. A diagnosis of the same magnitude to a poor person could be life threatening. When Carnegie talks about

In the gilded ages dating back to the nineteenth century both Andrew Carnegie and Henry George were known as very influential men of their time both striving towards the common goal of deflating poverty in hopes to diminish it as a whole. Though both Andrew and Henry shared a similar feat they had very different approaches and ideas of methodizing the overall goal. Carnegie was a shrewes businessman who viewed it to be acceptable for very rich and very poor people to co-exist as long as the rich provided that their surpluses aspired the community with parks or libraries for example to better themselves known as the "lasting good," and

Andrew Carnegie, "The Gospel of Wealth," discusses the way human life has transformed over the years. These changes can be good or bad ones, depending on how people use them. People are becoming more civilized. Every change has a price to pay, nothing comes without demands. Later on the text evolves into discussing surplus wealth and how people handle it. The three methods of adjusting excess wealth. One in which the leftover wealth goes to the family. As right as this may seem, it has some drawbacks, for one, the son may not want to work hard to earn wealth since it was passed down to him already. No incentive for him to get an education or career. The second method is used for public purposes. As noble as this sounds, the individual waited

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

This past weekend I was fortunate enough to go on a trip to Washington DC to attend an International Convention for Phi Theta Kappa Honors society. Little did I know that at about 4 a.m on a McDonalds run in the heart of DC I would have my “ah ha” moment for my Term paper. Our Uber (taxi) driver arrived to pick us up at our hotel and I was fortunate enough to hear his story about his journey from Africa to America. He has been living in Washington DC now for 27 years and it almost seems as if he incorporated every ounce of knowledge from Benjamin Franklins “Way to Wealth”. Our Uber driver informed us that he came to America to give himself a better quality of life. He wanted to make a name for himself, and to provide for his family. This man in a way incorporates Benjamin Franklins quote “early to bed, early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise”. Although he doesn’t have quite the same sleep schedule as Benjamin Franklin he does live by the same

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

Carnegie was also interested in political and social issues, writing a few books including Round the World in 1881, An American Four-in-Hand in Britain in 1883, and Triumphant Democracy in 1886. He was also a big fan of the educational system in the United States. In June of 1889, an article was published in the North American Review by Andrew about what he referred to as the “Gospel of Wealth”. In it, he stated that rich people have a duty to use their wealth towards benefiting the community. In his words, “A man who dies rich dies disgraced.2”

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

Although in “The Gospel of Wealth”, Carnegie agrees the wealth is controlled in the hand of rich people, but he believes that they should be allow to control their wealth and use it to help the society in various ways. One idea he uses in the reading is about “Survival of the fitness”, he believes the wealthy has his or her way to make the most money and the idea of competition in capitalism is highly beneficial to the society. As he states in the page 4, “We accept and welcome great inequality, the concentration of business, industrial, and commercial, in the hand of few as being not only beneficial, but essential to the future progress of the race,” he believes it is the duty and responsibility of the rich to help the “less fit”. The three modes he states also provides ways how the rich should using their money to help other, but they should not limit the freedom of others by simply give away the

By mandating these principles in order to receive the bonus, Henry Ford set standards for hard work, cleanliness, and good habits. According to Andrew Carnegie’s explanation of the gospel of wealth, the duty of a person with great wealth is “to set an example of modest, unostentatious living, shunning display or extravagance” (Brinkley 415). In addition, he stated that a man of wealth should administer surplus revenues “in the manner which, in his judgement, is best calculated to produce the most beneficial results for the community...bringing to [its] service his superior wisdom, experience, and ability to administer, doing for them better than they would or could do for themselves” (415). Carnegie argues that the wealthy should share their wealth in a way that they believe will benefit society. Likewise, Henry Ford administered the five dollar a day wage in a way that he believed bettered society by only giving bonuses to those who upheld specific moral

Wealtheow is the second woman who appears in Grendel. She is as Helming princess who is given to Hrothgar as his child wife by Hygomod, a rival king as tribute to Hrothgar’s power and prestige. Both Grendel and the Danes are spellbound by Wealtheow’s beauty and Grendel describes her as, “a women in a robe of threaded silver, her smooth long hair was as red as fire and as soft as the ruddy sheen on dragon’s gold, her face was gently, mysteriously calm” (Gardner 100). The name Wealtheow means “holy servant of common good” (Gardner 100). As Hrothgar’s wife, Wealtheow is a servant to his people and his kingdom. Grendel is instantly drawn to Wealtheow not only because of her beauty but the way she is able to dispel conflict with Hrothgar’s people.

If you were wealthy, Carnegie thought it was your responsibility to help those who are not. He believed that a rich man who dies with all of his money will not be missed as much as a rich man who died after giving his money

That said, by acknowledging the role of the skill of money management in the personal financial state, I, by no means advocate, or support, exploitation of poor by wealthy. Moreover, I believe that each person has an innate entitlement to be treated with dignity and respect, and not to be deprived of opportunities to pursue personal betterment, as long as doing so does not result in harm to the surrounding people. However, I have not met yet a person, who became exceptionally rich just by working hard, with no input from other resources. Extreme wealth and prosperity come in a package, consisting of individual character traits, education, experience, networking, and a living environment. Not everyone can handle finances appropriately and manage funds in a profitable way, increasing its value in the long-term. For example, look at the winners of the Powerball. People, who suddenly receive the amount they have never even dreamed about before, often many millions of dollars, frequently, are not capable of investing their resources wisely, and after several years or even months of lavish spending, they end up with nothing, wasting all of their funds carelessly. This example suggests that attempts to achieve the distributive justice by taking money from the rich and give them