Relationship Between The Worker And The Capitalist

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.

Modern economic society can be described as a combination of certain points from several theories combined into one. Changing dynamics and economic needs of nations has spawned a development of various, and contrasting, economic systems throughout the world. Perhaps the two most contrasting philosophies seen in existence today are that of capitalism and communism. The two philosophers most notably recognized for their views on these economic systems are Adam Smith and Karl Marx. This paper will identify several fundamental aspects of economic philosophy as described by Smith and Marx, and will compare and contrast the views of these

As civilization has evolved, economic inequality has existed since the feudal era and has made its place in modern society. It is a dilemma that examines the gap between the low wealth of the middle-class worker and the profitable earnings of the monopolizing upper-class business owner. It is a socio- economic issue that can best explored through the lens of the conflict theory; thoroughly explaining as to how the wealth gap came to exist and the consequences of such an economic state on the interaction between the middle-class worker and the wealthy businessman.

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

There are different opinions towards inequality, some people are accepting of it while others dislike the whole idea of inequality. Is it okay to let the wealthy have more control than the poor? Should their ideas matter more than the non-wealthy? And most importantly should the poor be okay with this, if not what must they do? In “Gospel of Wealth” by Andrew Carnegie and “The Communist Manifesto” by Karl Marx, both Carnegie and Marx expose their thoughts behind inequality and its traits. They both focus and touch upon the poor (proletarians) and the rich (bourgeoisie). They bring up the pros and cons about inequality, capitalism, and communism. Inequality was in Carnegie 's view. In his opinion progress required the processes of competition. Making capitalism an engine of progress. Carnegie believed that there is good to inequality while Marx begs to differ. Marx had his own view on capitalism, he believed that it would eventually result disastrous. Marx believed communism was the best solution to keep both the proletarians and bourgeoisie in an equal place. Both of these socialists have much to say about capitalism and communism and also for economic inequality. They both share different points of view, neither wrong or right. Their opinions are based towards their life experiences and this essay will be noting the differences between they share on inequality, the means of production, and capitalism.

Wealth can be defined as a surplus. This surplus is distributed among a society. The distribution creates associations among the people of the society with respect to wealth. The Gospel of Wealth, written by Andrew Carnegie, describes two classes and the association of wealth between them. Adam Smith’s passage, Of the Natural Progress of Opulence, similarly, includes a reciprocal relationship of production between the town and country. Unlike the other essays, Marx’s, Communist Manifesto, debunks the separation of classes and urges equal distribution of wealth and, The Position of Poverty, Galbraith’s composition, emphasizes the importance of wealth in the public sector to abolish poverty. The essays all have a common structure of the distribution of wealth and include some insight on how to maintain the distribution or how to alter it so that it is more beneficial to society. Carnegie, Smith, Marx, and Galbraith explain the distribution of wealth and it’s affects on society.

Income inequality is necessary for a capitalist society to thrive as it provides competition, hard work, and innovating ideas (Sutter).

Choice in production and Consumption: Capitalism gives the participants freedom to choose what they will make, based on supply and demand, thus responding to those who actively participate in it with either punishment or reward. They also can establish and determine the prices of the goods being distributed. One class member shared: “My brother John has the expertise and means to create digital artwork. With the freedom capitalism provides, he can choose to sell his art work, which makes him happy and provides fulfilment in his life.”

Capitalism started up as a system of investing and sharing money in order to increase the value of resources in the future. Capitalism was just an economic system, but then soon turned into a complex system of ethical practices. Harari defines capitalism as, “a set of teachings about how people should behave, educate their children and even think” (Harari 314). This economic system evolved along with the people that were endorsing it. Capitalism enables the rich to get richer, while the poor continue to get poorer. There are many benefits to capitalism, but there are downfalls as well, and these downfalls tend to be masked because of the rapid speed capitalists grow at. Harari first presents a definition for capitalism, and soon goes into great detail on why capitalism, while fast paced and unforgiving, is able to stand unwavered while other productions fail.

Capitalism is a subject that can be considered deeply controversial. There are many who tout the benefits that capitalism provides to the economy and the progress of human society. There are others who decry that it is a system which promotes selfish motives and extols profits above honesty and genuine goodness. This essay will examine the claims of each and will reach to conclude the answer to the question “is capitalism good?”

This essay will compare the economic principles of capitalism and communism by giving brief historical background on both and describing the two. I will begin with the father of economy, Adam Smith, and finish with the theories of Karl Marx.

Economic inequality has been a long-debated issue within the social sciences. The origin of the most recent debate has roots in Karl Marx’s works during the 19th century. Since Marx, the equality of distribution has become a heated topic in a wide range of social science from economic to social and political. Marx saw the growing inequality and poor working conditions in the beginning of the 19th century as a never-ending process of infinite accumulation of capital. This literature subsided due to the improvement of working conditions

Capitalism appears to satisfy the ‘need’ for power and acquisition above all else, and the evidence is seen in the growth of global wealth, which certainly does not amount to equal wealth. The

In capitalist production, goods are produced for the market in order to get a profit. What matters for the worker, as I’ve said, is that he or she gets an adequate amount for his or her labor. What is being produced is, in this sense, immaterial.

What makes a nation wealthy? Answering this basic question may not be as simple as it seems. Because we must first analyze what “wealth” is. This essay is going to cover Adam Smith and Karl Marx’s work and their views how the society works and how wealth is created. It is going to highlight the theory of “Division of labour” and how it shaped the social relations. Lastly Robert Heilbroner’s concept of “drive for capital” will be discussed and how it produces wealth and misery to analyze Sinclair’s insights into the nature of industrial life in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.