Andrew Carnegie was a very successful businessman. He was an idealist and one of the most important philanthropists of his time. He started Pittsburg’s Carnegie Steel Company, which he later joined with Elhert H. Gary’s federal steel company and several smaller companies to create U.S. Steel. The wealth from his success abled him to build foundations and institutions like Carnegie Hall. After his huge role in the steel business he spent most of the rest of his life as a philanthropist.
In today’s world the ownership of a business is businessman. The person with the legal rights or the paper work owns the business. The workers are just that, workers. I’m not able to decide which side is right or which side is wrong. Does the businessman own the business or do the workers own the business. I can understand both sides of that situation. Either side is 100% neither right nor wrong. What can be classified as positive or negative about the situation depends on which side you agree with. As a business owner I would automatically say that the business is mine. I’m the one that came up with the idea. So therefore I’m the rightful owner. If it wasn’t for me the workers wouldn’t be producing the product. Why should I split the business with the employee? As long as they were getting paid, I don’t see why they need to have any ownership of the business. 1The right of the laborer to his hundred dollars in the savings bank, and equally the legal right of the millionaire to his millions. Carnegie saw his workers as just the muscle not the brains of the whole process. And as a businessman that’s exactly the only way to see it. It’s my business; the workers get paid to produce my product. Having legal ownership of a business, you are the one with legal documentation. Without these forms such as titles/deeds, anyone is able to claim ownership. There wouldn’t be any way to prove ownership of the business without legal documentation. There would only be word of mouth which...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document