Andrew Carnegie's Three Forms Of Wealth Analysis

841 Words4 Pages
Andrew Carnegie discusses three different forms of distributing riches. Carnegie used ethos and pathos as well as vocabulary in order to strengthen his argument. The three methods are inheritance, distributing after death and distributing during a lifetime. Inheritance refers to the wealthy person leaving behind their riches to their children. Carnegie argues that this method often leads to failure. He says that it is too much pressure for the children. Having to manage a large estate without life experience or knowledge of maintaining a business. Carnegie also believes that leaving behind so much wealth sets up the descendants for failure. Since the offspring are not learning how to making a living with their own bear hands kids they will often end up in poverty. Most of these inheritors end up living off the wealth and not using it to better humanity, the wealth stagnates. Carnegie goes to say that it is rare for rich children to not be spoiled and to work for the greater good of the general public. Although there are exceptions Carnegie believes that this is the worst way to distribute wealth. Distribution after death, this consists of wealth being left behind to the public to do whatever with. While Carnegie believed this was good, he brings up the point that it is likely that the person whose money is being left behind won 't have their will fulfilled. He also makes the case that the money could be used for something that goes against the estate owners beliefs.

    More about Andrew Carnegie's Three Forms Of Wealth Analysis

      Open Document