Analysis Of Andrew Carnegie's Gospel Of Wealth

When the question of what to do with our wealth is raised to us at the end of our lives we read Andrew Carnegies "Gospel of Wealth." Andrew Carnegie argues that there are only three ways in which one can pass on their wealth. Of these three different ways Andrew Carnegie argues that the way to pass down wealth that is most beneficial to society is when it is administered during the lives of the possessors. I agree with the basis of Carnegie denouncing passing on wealth from father to son, and when the possessors of wealth pass away. Also I agree with the notion that Carnegie believes the only effective way to pass on wealth is within the possessors lifetime. In the "Gospel of Wealth" Andrew Carnegie believed that the idea of a wealthy man passing down his exceeding wealth to his son. As the son

Carnegie throughly believes that there is no respect for "leaving" your wealth after your death, "it may fairly be said that no man is to be extolled for doing what he cannot help doing, nor is he to be thanked by the community to which he only leaves wealth at death." (GoW) Carnegie believe that men who would leave their money at death maybe would've not left it at all and brought it with them. However, Carnegie does bring forth the fact that estates at the time would be taxed more once the previous owner had died, a policy that he hailed as "[wise]." This policy induces rich men to actually use their money for the good of society a whole during their life so they an choose how it's distributed instead of the government having full reign on how to use their "taxed" money. Carnegie finishes this tirade with a paragraph in how the races should swell over time so that no one can claim the previous possessors fortune, Carnegie believes a man doing this is frankly offending to society and waste of good