No... you and your ilk wish to change it that way so you don't have to be responsible for yourselves.... easier to leech off of people...
And lest we forget that you and many like you completely misinterpret ".. the general welfare of the United States" and you happen to leave those few ending words off, so that you can misrepresent what was written and meant
A real person does not ignore their own needs and does not believe they are the responsibility of someone else
I feel sorry for you that we can no longer return to the 1800s where everyone took care of themselves or died.
Since that time, the US has become the richest and most powerful nation in the history of mankind. To run such an economy, we need a workforce that is educated, in good health, satisfied with their living conditions and has a basic security net.
This is what is known as a middle class. A modern society has an obligation to take care of its people and ensure a basic standard of living is maintained. If it can't, it slips into third world status and is subject to revolution.
No, actually it doesn't. And even if it does that does not translate into "gov't has an obligation to do these things."
There were plenty of alternatives in the late 19th century, which showed the greatest outpouring of charity this country has known. How many hospitals were established? Orphanages? Soup kitchens? Universities? Libraries? All the result of private funding, all helping the poor in one way or another.
We don't see that much anymore because of confiscatory taxation and regulation policies and because gov't has squeezed out private charity.
Nutwinger, don't take this as a post directed at you since you are incapable of understanding it and responding appropriately.
Try and start your own railroad or any business to compete with the monopolies of that day Rabbi.
They would burn your business down and get away with it.
And you wonder why they had all the $ for the PR.