Custom «The Gospel of Wealth» Essay Paper Sample

Andrew Carnage was born in Scotland in 1835.His father Will was a weaver and a member of Chartism a movement among the British working class which encouraged people to vote and run for parliament so as to improve the working conditions of the people. Due to the exposure of such political beliefs and the fact that his family was poor impacted his life later when his family migrated to the United States in 1848. While in America he got a lot of wealth from his steel industry. Because of poverty in his family he was unable to receive adequate education. The poverty of his family however taught him a lesson and throughout his life, he was determined to bring prosperity to his family. Andrew was among the richest people during his time. He published the essay “The Gospel of Wealth” in 1889 .In this essay he argued that wealth accumulation is beneficial to the society and the government should not take any action to prevent it. He believed that the rich people acted as the trustees who kept money until the public got something useful to use the money for. Unlike other wealthy people of his time, he practiced what he preached to people and his last years were spent giving away his first fortune. He was involved in many charitable works for example he funded many public libraries. In his writings, he stated that the man who dies young dies disgraced (Jacobus 5).

There is problem of administration of wealth whereby the brother-hood relationship which existed between the rich and the poor enabling them to live in harmony is no longer there. The conditions of human life have changed within the first hundred years. During the olden days, little changes if any existed between dressing, dwelling places, and environment chiefs and their subjects. This change however between the rich and the poor is beneficial for the progress of the society. This is because the houses of the rich will act as storage places of the society’s important things as well as literature and art objects. If all people were poor, such material was lack proper storage facilities. The olden days which people thought were good were actually not good .Masters and servants were not as well placed as they are today. Olden days were as bad for the servant as for the master. It is the responsibility of both to alter changes so that they can benefit them regardless of whether the changes are good or not. The process through which change occurs can be demonstrated through the process of manufacturing objects which involves many human activities which have been invented scientifically. In the olden days the manufacture of articles was home based or small shops which were part of the homestead. The master worked together with his servants and they lived in the same place making to have exposure to similar conditions. When the servants later became their own bosses, they did not change their way of life and they taught the servants in the same procedure they were taught by their masters. Social and political equality existed between them (Jacobus 10). The manufacturing industries were disadvantageous because they produced poor quality products and sold them at high prices. Today people get high quality products at low prices. The same results can be seen in commercial markets whereby common people are benefitting. Today poor people are in a position to enjoy what the rich people in the olden days could not afford. What used to be luxury in normal in the modern days. The laborers of today lead better lived compared to landlords of olden days. The farmer has a better life than the landlord, they dress better than them and live in good houses.

According to Carnegie the law of completion is hard for an individual but for the race it is good. This is because the law of completion allows for the survival of the fittest in all environments. People must therefore accept and accommodate these conditions and the inequality which exists between various environments. People must also accept that industrial and commercial markets are controlled by a small group in the society and the law of competition which exists between them is beneficial and important for the progress of the society. The administration should be composed of wise people because indiscriminate charity is an impediment to the improvement of race. For the problem between n the rich and the poor to be solved, the law of accumulation and distribution should be left free. Individualism must go on but with the millionaires acting as trustees of the poor people. Carnegie suggested that this was the true gospel of wealth .When these ideas are obeyed by people the problems between the rich and the poor will solved and this will bring peace on earth among the individuals who have good will (Jacobus 15).

The essay by Andrew was aimed at changing the way in which rich people in the world about their wealth and the responsibilities that concerns the wealth. In his gospel of wealth , he aimed at the business world especially the upper class self-made millionaires who had the sense of philantrophy.He was a shred businessman but during his last days he paid back what he had taken. His main idea in the article concerned the dangers which could result when wealthy entrepreneurs pass on their wealth to their children, other people or other organizations which are not qualified. According to him money should be given to help the public instead of wasting money it on frivolous expenses or inefficiently using it. He explains how individualism, private property, and accumulation of wealth and competition give most of the society’s wealth to few people. He stated that wealth can be used in three ways: leaving all the wealth to the family members, leaving wealth to be used by the public after death or spending ones wealth throughout his/her life for the common good . He disagreed with the first two ways of spending wealth. According to him leaving all the wealthy to the children would do them more harm than good. It will make them lazy because they will be enjoying what they have not worked for. They will be lazy and may not spend the wealth in the right way. He encourages children to work hard so that they can get wealth of their own. In his essay he said that history is a proof that most children who inherit a lot of wealth from their parents use it foolishly enjoying their luxury life instead of investing it and in a wise way for future use or for the help of the public (Jacobus 16).

It was very hard for Andrew to give out his wealth because of what he wrote in the novel that money should not be used on frivolous expenditure. He gave out his money to institutions which constructed buildings like the libraries. According to him it was a better to give money in aid of something which will benefit the whole society rather than giving it to an individual. He discouraged charity work which other wealthy men of his time thought was good. He examined the mode of distributing accumulated wealth and capital to the communities of origin. He was against the idea of living comfortably and amassing wealth to oneself. He supported the British government because of taxing the estates of dead millionaires arguing that this would be a way of condemning the unworthy life of the selfish millionaires. He encouraged nations to continue with this kind of taxation. He made it clear that the rich were supposed to recalculate their wealth back for the benefit of the society (Jacobus 17). He suggested that children should be partially supported by their parents with much of the wealth being used to enrich the society. He claimed that when an individual helps the society and people here on earth, then he/she will be rewarded as soon as he enters the gates of paradise.

The philosophy of Carnage was based on the fact that people who inherit a lot of wealth do not use it in the right way. Also giving out charity is not encouraged because you cannot be sure that it will be used wisely. There is no guarantee that a charitable organization which is not under the direction of the person who donated the charity is going to use the money according to his wishes. He disapproved giving charity to people arguing that it made the poor to remain in the same position. He suggested that another mode of giving which gives the beneficiaries of gift an opportunity to help them should be created. This will lead to both consumption and production of greater wealth in the society. Nowadays, there is a great difference between the house of a millionaire and that of his laborer which has resulted from civilization. The balance between the rich and the poor should be narrowed down and this can only happen if the wealthy few redistribute their wealth to the poor people. Children from wealthy families should be encouraged to work hard and obtain their own wealth which will be a way of curbing dependency. The only proper way of using personal fortune should be through establishment of a project which will benefit the public. This is the only way of ensuring proper use (Jacobus 18