The two Carnegie's:
Many had conflicted opinions about Carnegie. Some saw him as evil and some saw him as great. He underpaid his employees and often put them in dangerous positions, but he knew that in order to have the cheapest steel, he had to cut costs, including labor. The thing that separates him from a robber baron is the fact that he underpaid for a reason.
For example: if someone overcharges a consumer for a intangible object, they are in a sense "robbing" them. The difference with Carnegie is that he knew he had to so he could be at the top of the industry. After retiring, he became a philanthropist and relieved his workers by giving them pensions and gave back to society. This is where many have conflicted views about him. He made his money and then gave back, which is what matters.
For example: if someone overcharges a consumer for a intangible object, they are in a sense "robbing" them. The difference with Carnegie is that he knew he had to so he could be at the top of the industry. After retiring, he became a philanthropist and relieved his workers by giving them pensions and gave back to society. This is where many have conflicted views about him. He made his money and then gave back, which is what matters.
Courtesy of believingoutloud.com