Similarities Between Shakira Meberak And Andrew Carnegie

“What we have done for ourselves alone dies with us; what we have done for others and the world remains and is immortal.” (Pike). This is the belief of Shakira Ripoll Meberak and Andrew Carnegie, two paradoxical people that will go down in history for their philanthropy among their other enormous accomplishments. Shakira is a very successful songwriter, dancer and singer, but she has a flipside. A much deeper side than most would expect from such a shallow persona is her charitable side. Carnegie, also has another side to him that made him equally as famous as his huge business skills. Carnegie was also a huge philanthropist. Shakira at only 37 years old has already donated millions and changed childhood development. Both are extremely rich

He sailed to the US, knowing that he would start at the very bottom of his career, but he saw opportunity. His hard work continued throughout his adult life and at one point this lead him to becoming the world’s richest man. Needless to say, he was a huge success through his modern business tactics in the steel industry. Carnegie was the first for many things in the world of philanthropy and business, “Many persons of wealth have contributed to charity, but Carnegie was, perhaps, the first to state that the rich have a moral obligation to give away their fortunes.” (Columbia University Libraries 1). Carnegie wrote the “Gospel of Wealth” that was based on his belief that a man should spend the first third of his life learning, the second working and the third choosing how to distribute his wealth to benefit the world. This is what he believed and he thought that everyone should live their lives in this way as

Carnegie was often accused of taking advantage of the poor economy and the lack of regulations by underpaying and overworking his employees. During this time period, the nation was skeptical of Carnegie because of his ‘double-role’ in society. This much can be inferred from The Saturday Globe’s political cartoon titled Forty-Millionaire Carnegie In His Great Double Role. By double role, the cartoon refers to his great philanthropy in contrast to the poor working conditions he provided to his workers. Carnegie was writing big checks to many organizations while he paid his workers less for longer hours. In Aguilera’s words, “Contemporary articles and cartoons called into question his focus on higher education, which at the time was considered a luxury of the rich,” (Aguilera 1). He was a power hungry man that didn’t let anything or anyone in the way of his success. He also had a distrust towards charities. So instead of saving lives with his money, he donated it towards education. This was a great way to donate, but to think of the lives that could have been saved makes one question if this was the right way to