You, my friend, are brilliant and a great writer. That being said, Carnegie fits neatly in the tradition of contemporary billionaires who assume they merit their wealth and revel in the power that plutophilanthropy provides to impose their sense of what’s important on the world, to give and withdraw at will - not to mention to enjoy and reap the benefits of all the adulation that comes with wealth and the appearance of generosity. But of course you are right that while Carnegie had an excuse for undervaluing taxes, the contemporary wealthy do not. Thanks for writing and sharing this.
I'll ignore your initial confused judgment and skip to the substance: Agreed, Carnegie's views map remarkably closely onto Bill Gates and the relative handful of billionaires following his example. What's interesting, though, is the fact that these enlightened few in 2022 are a) enlightened by the standards of 1889 and b) few. The Larry Ellisons of the billionaire set were by far the most common variety in 1889 and they are by far the most common variety today. All that's changed, it seems to me, is that the number of people -- billionaire and otherwise -- who publicly and vociferously believe it is right and proper for billionaires to use their fortunes however they wish has grown substantially. Thus making Andrew Carnegie, of all people, sound like a fulminating radical.
but for added clarity i’d say both categories think billionaires should spend however they wish on yachts or what they define as public goods or both or neither
What an excellent essay to start the day.
I did not see that coming.
Carnegie in favor of taxes?
Estate (aka death) taxes?!?
You are never uninteresting.
You, my friend, are brilliant and a great writer. That being said, Carnegie fits neatly in the tradition of contemporary billionaires who assume they merit their wealth and revel in the power that plutophilanthropy provides to impose their sense of what’s important on the world, to give and withdraw at will - not to mention to enjoy and reap the benefits of all the adulation that comes with wealth and the appearance of generosity. But of course you are right that while Carnegie had an excuse for undervaluing taxes, the contemporary wealthy do not. Thanks for writing and sharing this.
I'll ignore your initial confused judgment and skip to the substance: Agreed, Carnegie's views map remarkably closely onto Bill Gates and the relative handful of billionaires following his example. What's interesting, though, is the fact that these enlightened few in 2022 are a) enlightened by the standards of 1889 and b) few. The Larry Ellisons of the billionaire set were by far the most common variety in 1889 and they are by far the most common variety today. All that's changed, it seems to me, is that the number of people -- billionaire and otherwise -- who publicly and vociferously believe it is right and proper for billionaires to use their fortunes however they wish has grown substantially. Thus making Andrew Carnegie, of all people, sound like a fulminating radical.
See, brilliant.
but for added clarity i’d say both categories think billionaires should spend however they wish on yachts or what they define as public goods or both or neither
Like a great cup of joe Andrew Carnegie was both rich and rewarding as was this excellent presentation of his life and legacy.