The Gospel Of Wealth By Andrew Carnegie

“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.

In the Gospel of Wealth Carnegie discussed how wealthy men help the poor and working class with charity. Since the wealthy get to choose where the money goes to it helps the poor more than it would by being given to them. The money went to programs and services the poor needed rather than being given to the poor that would spend it on unneeded resources. The superior education and understanding of the industrialists and wealthy helped the poor and working class more because with charity they could choose what programs would get the funding needed to help the poor.

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

The Gospel of Wealth is primarily about the dispersion of wealth and the responsibilities of those who have it. Carnegie thinks that inheritance is detrimental to society because it does not do any good for the

“Money talks” is an expression many form as a simple analogy to the problem associated with wealth today. However, the value of money is not to be taken in vain as money does not always showcase the attributes of knowledge and power. At the same time, those who do possess money do, in some cases, possess the attributes commonly associated with the wealthier class. “Money and Class in America” wrote by Lewis Lapham in 1988, showcases the pessimistic feelings Lapham has towards the American faith in money. Lapham believes that Americans are at a loss to hold the majesty of money at bay. Though I agree with Lapham to a point, I also believe that the assumptions of Americans do apply to a point.

According to Carnegie, the responsibility of those who receive charity from the wealthy is to give the money only to those who deserve it. In 1889 Carnegie wrote an essay, “The Gospel of Wealth,” in which he argued against what he called “indiscriminate almsgiving.” He began with the statement that there is a valid and significant difference among worthy and non-worthy poor. Some people, Carnegie argued, are poor through no accountability of their own: sometimes situations puts one in an undesirable position, making it hard to advance despite one’s best determinations.

A majority of what people know about wealthy individuals comes from television, movies or novels and a lot of misconceptions about them are inaccurate. People forget that wealthy individuals have similar problems as themselves; this can include anxiety about their children, uncertainty over their relationships and fears of isolation. The universal saying that “money cannot buy happiness” rings true to the novels Water for Elephants, written by Sarah Gruen and The Great Gatsby, by Scott Fitzgerald. The characters from both books fail to find happiness from wealth. Through marxism both literary works show that being physically wealthy may not necessarily equate to happiness in a capitalist society dominated by the bourgeoisie. This idea is depicted through people valuing materialistic goods for their sign value, becoming victims to conspicuous consumption, and falling under a

In the 20th century it was a time in which you could attain wealth quickly manufacturing without having capital to start off with. He believes the advantage of becoming wealthy does not lay within starting out with wealth, but with having the knowledge of what people need. His ideals derive from the certainty that opportunity is in the hands of human needs. Conwell expands on how prospects of money is in near reach of many, however, they are just unaware of it. He gives many examples of people and their experiences with wealth and poverty. Conwell spoke of many people moving to find wealth, when there was many opportunity for wealth within the city that they had lived. However, they did not know of those opportunities; again, referencing that wealth is in close connection with knowledge. Conwell concludes his speech with describing his definition of greatness. Greatness defined by Conwell is accomplishing things of significant purposes, as well as working, no matter what career, and becoming something better than where you started. He reminds the audience that they can become successful starting from where they are and being who they are, and that these circumstances don’t matter when it comes to being

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

17). That the rich were mere trustees of their wealth, and the poor trusted them to use it in a beneficial way (“Celebrating Andrew Carnegie”). Like improving living conditions, building more homes, and improving sanitation in factories and buildings. Carnegie also explains how a wealth man can’t leave his wealth without gaining a distaste in peoples mouth that may not have been there before. To the common man, the wealth seemed like people of got it easy and didn't have any hardships in their lives, but Carnegie explains that wealth wasn't such a breeze, but a burden for

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.”

Andrew Carnegie was an industrialist who believed in social darwinism. He stated that, “that this talent for organization and management is rare among men is proved by the fact that it invariably secures for its possessor enormous rewards, no matter where or under what laws or conditions.” This means that those who were wealthier were better than those who had less. However, he believed that when someone became wealthy they became beneficial to society. In an essay he wrote to society called “The Gospel of Wealth” he argued how wealthy men like him had the responsibility in making sure to use their wealth to help aid society. Despite this, people didn’t automatically agree with Carnegie.

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.

People say money is the root of all evil, but it’s more frequently used for good. Wealth, an part of a happy life, can turn into charity which causes lived to be changed.