What did our founders really mean when they said “general welfare”?

[SeaMajor7]

SeaMajor7

You "laughed" before I finished my last answer. Tell me please what you "laugh" about or what you really think about when you "laugh" in such a context. Example: If you have a ton full of money then you feel save - do you also feel save when you have 10 tons of chewing gum which "represent" this money?

Fungible assets for ones labor is in no way "fake".

 

[zaangalewa]

Fungible assets for ones labor is in no way "fake".

Eh? What do you say here?

Example. My wife and her team had to fire a young woman with a low IQ although everyone liked to help her in the company where she is. But in the end they found out that she needs a second person who supports her continuously. Everyone felt sorry - but she had to go because no one found any way how to organize in an efficient way work with her.

She was sad because she had to go, everyone in the company was sad because she had to go, her parents had been sad because she had to go. I fear only I admired them all because they all - everyone of them - tried to do the best and I'm sure gods blessing is over them all and his angels will protect them.

But what do you do with someone like her? Specially because she also has the right to be happy. And what if her relativelly old parents will die?

 

[Mac-7]

Not all programs help everyone equally.

Some people may have no use for that bridge and complain because it helps others but not them

General welfare helps society as a whole

My definition is as close as we can get

It certainly beats Uncle Santa Claus handing out money to individuals

 

[SeaMajor7]

Eh?

"Money for nothing; get your chicks for free."
If only........

 

[Mac-7]

“A war”?

My typo

I meant “car”

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[CowboyTed]

If you voted for Trump there’s a good chance you’re a lot like me with regard to why....I voted for him on two policies almost exclusively...First and foremost on how he would deal with illegal Mexicans

You know Trump put in the ground work for making the crisis much worse.

He cut security aid to countries down south. This made them more dangerous and thus they fled North...

The best way to stop people coming from the south is to help increase security south of the border and increase investment and trade. People on the border didn't suddenly decide they wanted to move to America(it is dangerous and leaving your homeland)...

So always remember Trump talked a big game but his actions created more havoc down south that created the mess at the border.

 

[Libby von H]

From the Journal of Federalism

"According to James Madison, “the most important and fundamental question” he ever addressed was the meaning of and relation between the general welfare clause and the enumeration of particular powers. This question is the most “fundamental” because the answer determines the very “idea” or “nature” of the U.S. Constitution. Commentators virtually agree on the answer Madison proposed and defended in Federalist 41, namely, that the general welfare clause is neither a statement of ends nor a substantive grant of power. It is a mere “synonym” for the enumeration of particular powers, which are limited and wholly define its content. From this answer, it follows that the primary meaning of the national dimension of the federal Constitution is limited government, understood as a government with a limited number of powers or means. The thesis of this essay, however, is that, contrary to the commentators' claims, Madison argued that the clause was a substantive grant of power for the generally stated end and that the primary purpose of the ensuing enumeration was to define more particularly the ends alluded to by the phrase “general welfare.” Hence, the meaning of the general constitutional government in the American federal system is a government oriented to a limited number of limited ends."

I am aware of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist debates but virtually all said government was to be LIMITED.

 

[rightwinger]

My definition is as close as we can get

It certainly beats Uncle Santa Claus handing out money to individuals

By that you mean not helping poor and struggling families

I don’t want a country like that

 

[rightwinger]

I am aware of the Federalist and Anti-Federalist debates but virtually all said government was to be LIMITED.

We need a right sized government as determined by We the People

A Government of the people, by the people and for the people

 

[eagle1462010]

We need a right sized government as determined by We the People

A Government of the people, by the people and for the people

You want supersized be my daddy, tax to death govt.

We want powers returned to States Govt Agencies SLASHED and then you can be dumb asses in your shithole states like Cali. Wouldnt care.

Wouldnt care now but you fucks trying to do it Nationwide.

 

[zaangalewa]

"Money for nothing; get your chicks for free."
If only........

Okay - you are not able to be taken serios, atheist. Do you have a job?

 

[SeaMajor7]

Okay - you are not able to be taken serios, atheist. Do you have a job?

I'm at work right now. 31 years at my great job this month!
Thanks for asking, and may God bless you.

 

[rightwinger]

We want powers returned to States Govt Agencies SLASHED and then you can be dumb asses in your shithole states like Cali. Wouldnt care.

We need governmental powers divided by local, state and federal based on what makes the most sense

 

[TNHarley]

They also made a Supreme Court to take appeals and rule on the constitutionality of laws. That’s how the system has been working

Hence, why I said "challenge"

 

[Slade3200]

Hence, why I said "challenge"

Yeah well the stuff mentioned by the OP as being unconstitutional has held up through time. It’s gone through our constitutional law making and appeals process yet there are still turds out there trying to undermine our system and claim it’s illegal.

 

[TNHarley]

Yeah well the stuff mentioned by the OP as being unconstitutional has held up through time. It’s gone through our constitutional law making and appeals process yet there are still turds out there trying to undermine our system and claim it’s illegal.

So was segregation. Internment. etc etc etc
Doesnt mean it was constitutional.
Its like that bitch on the SC now that said the first is getting in the way of govt censorship.

 

[rightwinger]

So was segregation. Internment. etc etc etc
Doesnt mean it was constitutional.
Its like that bitch on the SC now that said the first is getting in the way of govt censorship.

Yes it does

If your interpretation is different than the courts, why don’t you challenge it?

 

[TNHarley]

Yes it does

If your interpretation is different than the courts, why don’t you challenge it?

So if the SC said we werent allowed to protest, it would be fine? Or if they established a national religion and we were forced to adhere to it?

 

[rightwinger]

So if the SC said we werent allowed to protest, it would be fine? Or if they established a national religion and we were forced to adhere to it?

The Constitution has provisions for you to challenge
If you fail, that is your problem

Unfortunately, our Constitution gives that role to the Judicial Branch not uneducated message board posters