A "hero" is considered to be courageous and to have noble qualities and achievements, but over time, the "hero" definition changes to be something else. The view of a "hero" now has become one of wealth. Andrew Carnegie was a man of wealth and was a hero during the second Industrial Revolution, as well as a well-known great philanthropist. Due to his achievements in helping people, many have considered him to be a hero, while others view him as only benefiting himself.
Andrew Carnegie was born in Scotland, where his family was not the wealthiest and had difficulty maintaining a standard of living. The Carnegie family of four lived in an attic room above the shop that belonged to his father, who was a weaver, but it was shared with another family (Doc 1). When the Carnegie family decided to come over to America, he started working at the age of 18. He was noticed by the general superintendent of the Pennsylvania Railroad, where he became interested in steel and its benefits.
…show more content…
Carnegie believed in laissez-faire capitalism, but if the law ensured the survival of the fittest, then let the government's laws interfere (Doc 2). In addition, Carnegie argued that it was shameful for the wealthy to utilize their wealth to advance society while they were still alive, as opposed to the widespread practice of leaving all of one's wealth to one's successors. He believed that the duty of wealth should be used to set examples of modest living and produce beneficial results for the community. (Doc
Andrew Carnegie, a late 19th century steel magnate, was immensely successful during the Gilded Age. He kept wages low while eliminating competition, so that workers had no choice but to stay in Carnegie’s company. The Gilded Age is so called because the top appeared to be gold (i.e. the richest people were doing extremely well) but on the inside there were insurmountable wealth inequalities (I.e the rich succeeded at the expense of the rest of the nation). Andrew Carnegie was a large causer of wealth inequality . In his “Gospel of Wealth” he justifies the trend by stating that in an ideal world the rich would give to the poor, but unfortunately our world is impossible.
Andrew Carnegie was a significant person in history because he was a wealthy businessman living the American dream, a dream everyone hoped to experience but never did. Coming from humble beginnings, Carnegie came from Scotland to America as a poor immigrant working from job to job before becoming a secretary on the Pennsylvania railroad. He was a diligent worker and was paid in forms of stock which Carnegie eventually sold, allowing him to begin the Carnegie Steel company. By 1900, Carnegie had around 20,000 employees producing more steel than England because he constantly found cheaper production methods for making steel. However, unlike the other monopoly holders, Carnegie donated nearly $350,000 out of the $400,000 to charitable organizations
They decided on living in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania. Although he had little formal education, Carnegie grew up in a family that believed in the importance of books and learning (Biography. “Andrew Carnegie.”). His father had the job of handweaving and he traveled many places to sell the products that he eventually ended up creating. To help support her family, Margaret Carnegie (Andrew’s mother) started a job as a shoe binder for local shoemakers.
Carnegie was “One of the richest men in Gilded Age America, he promoted what he called the Gospel of Wealth, the idea that those who accumulated money had an obligation to use it to promote the advancement of society. ”(Foner pg.32) This is exactly how he used his wealth to help the less fortunate. Although the Gilded age was good, there were a lot of negatives. There was a tremendous amount of “economic inequality because the state did not regulate the growth of business.
Andrew Carnegie's views on wealth is almost the same as how billionaires think and use their money today . Carnegie's thought that people with money they would be able to help the poor by building libraries and other type of building that would help the middle class to get an education. He taught by helping the middle class rise from poverty and give them an education they would be able to do great things in life. Based on what I have read in both article Andrew Carnegie's views were considered ethical because he wanted what was best for the poor and he wanted to help the coal miners and give everyone an education.
I agree with Andrew Carnegie’s decision to donate and invest his accumulated wealth in the public because it is the most useful and beneficial way to spend his wealth. Moreover, I believe that distributing the money to relatives or keeping the money to oneself does not sufficiently utilize the money. By donating and investing in the public, a majority of the money can be spent on necessities for the general public, rather than spending the money on a single person. In other words, Andrew Carnegie’s decision to donate and invest in the general public benefits significantly more people than it would if he were to give it to relatives or keep it to himself. Furthermore, I believe that withholding the money to oneself is unrightful in the sense
(http://study.com/academy/lesson/gospel-of-wealth-definition-summary.html). Many aspect of Carnegie’s philosophy came from personal experiences that he encountered throughout his lifetime. He really wanted individuals to learn how to be financially stabled and have information to pass down to their children and other generations to come. For example,
Someone who is courageous, intelligent and has reached a significant achievement is called a hero. A man named Andrew Carnegie, born in Scotland in 1835, does not fit this definition of hero. Carnegie started off as a poor man who developed into a very successful businessman. He had intelligent business skills, including vertical integration which made him a rich man. However, his success does not define him as a hero.
In the Gospel of Wealth article, Carnegie argues that the best way on helping society was to help improve people themselves. Carnegie did not believe that the rich simply give the money directly towards the poor. Instead, he wanted to set up intuitions for the poor to allow people to help there self. According to Carnegie, “ [T]he main consideration should be to help those who will help themselves; to provide part of the means by which those who desire to improve may do so...” (Carnegie, 1889).
More importantly, Galbraith holds a different view on the duty and ability to aid from Carnegie. Carnegie supports policies which “induce the rich man to attend to the administration of wealth during his life, which is the end that society should always have the view” (Carnegie 490). He encourages rich people to distribute his wealth to help the poor during their lifetimes, which shows that it is the rich’s responsibility to administrate wealth in a society. More than duty, Carnegie believes that only the rich has the ability to efficiently administrate wealth. He condemns the way of distributing wealth after the rich man is dead since it is not efficient in that “it requires the exercise of not less ability than that which acquired the wealth
Rather, he thought that wealthy men had a responsibility to determine how the money they made was spent. Carnegie himself became a huge philanthropist and his essay, “The Gospel of Wealth” started a large wave of philanthropy. His essay states that the “surplus wealth of the few will become, in the best sense, the property of the many, because administered for the common good, and this wealth, passing through the hands of the few, can be made a much more potent force for the elevation of our race than if it had been distributed in small sums to the people themselves.”
Becoming wealthy comes with a lot of responsibilities, Carnegie said that he lived frugally, so his money started racking up, and then he sold his business which concluded to an extreme amount of money. But many workers of his said that his conditions and wages were not fair for how much he was making. “Carnegie, more than any other businessman of the era, championed the idea that America’s leading tycoons owed a debt to society. He believed that, given the circumstances of their successes, they should serve as benefactors to the less fortunate public” (textbook). Carnegies’ Gospel of Wealth states that he put copious amounts of dedication into his work.
A hero is someone who does a meaningful deed, worthy of remembrance and selflessly. Andrew Carnegie was a wealthy man. After he sold his steel company in 1900, he devoted the rest of his life giving money to charity. Did Andrew Carnegie’s generosity make him a hero? Andrew Carnegie was not a hero.
He believed that if the wealthy don't give back some of their profits to the community, they are living a dishonorable life, and although I didn't necessarily agree with this radical viewpoint at first, I now am a firm believer in Carnegie's argument about wealth.
The captains of industry believed that the poor people were inferior to the rich people. The rich were superior because they had “wisdom, experience, and the ability to administer”. The duty of a rich person was to help out a poor person which was what was said in the Gospel of Wealth. The Gospel of Wealth is about how the rich person's responsibility is philanthropy. Carnegie believes in charity work so he would donate to libraries, and universities and schools and etc.