Essay about The True Gospel of Wealth: Andrew Carnegie.

Andrew Carnegie, the “King of Steel”, the benevolent employer, the giant of industry, was among the greatest influences of the second industrial revolution. It is sometimes questioned whether Carnegie was the ruthless, sneaky steel tyrant some made him out to be, or the generous, benevolent education benefactor he appeared to be. I believe him to be a combination of both, but more so the great giant of industry.

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.

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

Finally, Carnegie should be considered a hero because of his philanthropy contributions and donations to society. Andrew Carnegie believed that the best way to spend your fortune was to devote it for the most beneficial results for the community by providing them what they could not do for themselves (Doc 8). Carnegie spent most of his life gaining immense amounts of money and becoming one of the richest men of the 19th century. Once he retired, he felt he needed to use his

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 believes in a system based on principles and responsibility. The system is Individualism and when everyone strives towards the same goals the system is fair and prosperous. Carnegie’s essay is his attempt to show people a way to reach an accommodation between individualism and fairness. This system can only work if everyone knows and participates in his or her responsibilities. I will discuss Carnegie’s thesis, his arguments and the possible results of his goals.

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”

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.

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.

From the intro of the book, Carnegie clearly explains that there should be a divide in social class and shows no sign of wanting to eliminate poverty. In addition to that, he somewhat belittles previous civilizations in which everyone was equal. Carnegie states, “The conditions of human life have not only been changed but revolutionized, within the past few hundred years. In former days

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

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.”

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

Carnegie’s views are considered ethical based on Survival of the Fittest and philanthropy. Carnegie says the gap between the rich and poor is a great thing and it is true not everyone can be a wealthy man realistically. There must be a balance even after reading the selection of the life of the average coal miner.