I always find it amazing when I read this piece the firm distinction Carnegie makes between running a business and being useful to the community. This distinction is so deep in his writing that one of the reasons he favors a high death tax is to recompense society for the unworthy lives of businessmen who have contributed nothing.
Walking through boarded up Main Streets, my first thought is never – “Oh, there should be more non profits here.” My first thoughts are how neat it would have been to be here when that Art Deco mercantile was open, or to see first run movies in the type of theatre that only existed in the downtown of yester-year.
Sure, things change. The point, though, is the sadness in closed downtowns is primarily that there is no business. Doing business was/is helping the community. This does not mean that charity is not laudable; it is just to say that doing business is serving the community. Carnegie is just wrong on this point.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Posts
Posts
Subscribe To
Posts
Posts
Blogs
Followers
Blog Archive
Labels
- about (1)
- Adam Smith (4)
- Atlas Shrugged (7)
- Ayn Rand (3)
- business ethics (2)
- Carnegie (2)
- Census Data (1)
- Conservative (1)
- Despots (1)
- Doherty (1)
- Eminent Domain (1)
- expectations (1)
- Friedman (1)
- Gompers (1)
- Hobbes (4)
- Hume (2)
- John Stuart Mill (2)
- key terms (1)
- Keynes (1)
- Laughlin (1)
- Left (1)
- Liberal (1)
- Liberty (3)
- Locke (2)
- Malthus (2)
- Market (4)
- Marx (2)
- Mercantilism (1)
- platitudes (1)
- Polanyi (1)
- Pop Management (1)
- Reference (2)
- Right (1)
- Rothbard (1)
- Scandals (1)
- Self-Interest (1)
- Taylor (1)
- That's not Business (3)
- The Firm (2)
- Trump (1)
- Twitter (1)
- Villains (1)
2 comments:
“This does not mean that charity is not laudable; it is just to say that doing business is serving the community. Carnegie is just wrong on this point.”
Do I understand you correctly? Is it your position that it is Carnegie’s contention that a man (or woman) that is very successful in business is not serving the community and has contributed nothing to that community?
If so, then you are missing Carnegie’s whole point of his discussion. He is saying that those very successful in business are providing a great service to the community and to society as a whole. However, he adds that this responsibility of service does not end with the provision of employment and of accumulating great wealth during ones life, only to have it taxed away at death to ‘finally’ benefit those that made it possible. This was what Carnegie would call a failed life. “A disgrace.” He is saying that the final mark of true business success is obtained by the wealthy business owner, himself, actively managing the giving of his wealth back to the society that it has come from. Carnegie uses the term “in trust” which is very appropriate. A truly successful business career is marked by the later years as one of the thoughtful administration of those trust funds for the public benefit. This, he says, is the successful business owner’s final acts of service to the community.
Carnegie, during his lifetime provided gainful employment to thousands, the successor to his company still exists and is still providing employment over 100 years later, and the multitude of public institutions and charitable organizations that he established during the later years of his life are still benefiting society nearly 100 years after his death.
I cannot see how this is indicative of a “firm distinction … between running a business and being useful to the community.” Rather, it is a demonstration of community service of the highest order and has shown the way for those that have followed him.
- C. Emrich
My reaction to Andrew Carnegie’s readings were very shocked and interesting because I like how he discuss about his life story of growing up poor and finding ways to work and do anything in order to be successful. I thought that his readings can give a good detail message to his readers on motivating yourself to do anything you put your mind to. I felt that at his age, it was a big risk to work and saved money in order to help your family out, but at the end it led him to a good caused.
“Doing business was/is helping the community. This does not mean that charity is not laudable; it is just to say that doing business is serving the community. Carnegie is just wrong on this point.”
Your sentence in the last paragraph confused me because you making it seem like Carnegie is wrong to help and served the community. I feel that it is a great thing to help and served others because life is not about yourself and the things you do, it’s about enjoying it and caring for others when needed. Carnegie provided some good for his community and offers thousands of jobs for those people in need. The only thing I didn’t like what Carnegie did was hiring Henry Frick as the general manager of the Homestead Plant. During the Homestead Strike, I blamed Carnegie for his actions to have Frick control the business, where he affected employee’s lives by his bad decision making. I also think Carnegie left town on purpose because he knew what was going to happen.
C.Shelby
Post a Comment