What he means by this is that it’s not only the right thing to do but it is the duty of the wealthy elites to ensure the advancement of society as a whole. Moreover, he even takes it a step further and asserts that, “They [rich men] have it in their power during their lives to busy themselves in organizing benefactions from which the masses of their fellows will derive lasting advantage, and thus dignify their own lives” (Carnegie 370). Thus, the philanthropy of the rich is not only beneficial to the community but also the individual. His favor of a Carnegie later goes on to even go as far as condemning those who worships wealth as a false idol. He is very critical of those who hoarded their surplus riches while living and only wait until their death to allow their amassed fortune to be used for public goods.
In vertical integration, Carnegie bought companies that produce resources for steel making. Because he didn’t have to pay for the resources, he was able to make more profit. In combination with horizontal integration, the merging with or taking over of other similar companies in order to establish a monopoly, Carnegie was able to make staggering amounts of money. These business strategies clearly display that Carnegie was an innovative and successful captain of industry. Many people criticize Carnegie because he made so much money and paid his workers little in comparison, but Carnegie would go on to donate millions of dollars to worthy causes.
Economic/Political Analysis -Are the poor and the wealthy equally concerned about the “freedom from fear”? Compare and contrast both speeches to answer this question.- From President Franklins Roosevelts speech and Barack Obamas speech, the poor and wealthy people are fairly concerned about “freedome of fear.” There are quite a few things that a lot of people in this world are in fear of. President also said in his speech that we shouldn’t fear anything, but fear itself. It also, doesnt mean if you are not as rich in this world as others around you, you can not do the things wealthy people do to improve in the world. President Franklin Roosevelt also said in one of his speeches that, you dont have to be rich to be happy in life, happiness in life comes from accomplishment.
Third, he says,“The best thing a man can do for his culture when he is rich is to endeavor to carry out those schemes which he entertained when he was poor.” That wouldn’t be the finest thing to do if he did things wrong in the past, it would be better to continue working hard to preserve their wealth. They get money because of what they’re doing in the present, not by sustaining schemes from the past. Henry David
Response paper The essay “The way to wealth”, written by Benjamin Franklin and published in 1757, deals with the former bad economical situation in America and gives advice how to escape from it to achieve a wealthier life. In the following, I will elaborate on the different kinds of virtues that Franklin found important in order to become wealthier as well as the fact that they are still relevant nowadays. Benjamin Franklin points out that every man can improve his life and accomplish wealth by working hard, spending time efficiently and saving and spending money wisely. If you use your time efficiently, not by being lazy but by working, you will improve your situation. Nobody will ever be successful by being lazy.
Rockefeller defined modern philanthropy by donating more than 550 million dollars to charities, churches, schools of all kind, and organizations throughout the nation. John D. Rockefeller is perhaps the greatest American Industrialist and Philanthropist in modern history. Rockefeller has had experience with the working world since he was sixteen starting out as a bookkeeper at a small firm in Cleveland. Rockefeller once said “The most important thing for a young man is to establish a credit… a reputation, character” (Xpore Inc). Like his father, Rockefeller believed that work could build character and “make ‘em sharp”.
For example, greed causes businessmen to compete with other businessmen, thus, keeping prices reasonable and forces them to keep up with consumer demands. But then greed could cause businessmen to make not so smart decisions to make more money which may affect everyone in the economy negatively. But I still believe that greed is good for capitalism in the US. I
Haylee Michael 11/5/11 Ap US- Chapter 5 essay The “Framers” of our Constitution are looked at through two different spectacles; those who believe these men had our nation in consideration, and those who say the Constitution was a way to enhance their financial stability. Although, most of these men were of money, power, and property, they have still sacrificed for our country to benefit us as a whole. There is no saying that just because these men were already of wealth, that they would create the Constitution just to ensure it. In reality, it was a benefit that these were the men that wrote it; we cannot expect the poor in our society to be the framers, when these were the men of highest education. Without the Constitution America
Disharmony might arise when people felt the system was not fair, for example, when large bonuses are paid to bankers during a recession. Parsons and inequality Parsons developed Durkheim’s ideas and said that: In industrialised societies stratification, and therefore inequality, exists on the basis of which roles are agreed by the most important, and therefore the most functional for society. The agreement occurs because people are socialised into the shared norms and values for society, initially by the family, and subsequently by education and the other agents. The value consensus that results is what holds society together and it gives it social order.
A Marxist would argue the same, but because of the underlying limitations (“leveling” by the people or a ruling power i.e. giving and taking of resources directed by an outside party) such high aspirations are not so easily achieved. Nor should items like wealth or power be actively sought for by the Marxist, because those are the evils that create inequality. The similarities between liberalism and Marxism economic views are important. Marx agreed with the liberal economic viewpoint that a free-market is “good” with benefits gained from competition.