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

[danielpalos]

General welfare to Founders = protection of property, liberty, and community through law and order. Government getting into economics had nothing to do with it.

the clause is general, not common.

 

[danielpalos]

Whatever the "founders" meant, it was according to their 18th century view.

they were rather incredible then eh? the only thing they didn't count on were folks like the left losing common sense.

lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. Madison merely had a large vocabulary, not any form of understanding of economics.

What planet are you on? Nobody takes Keynesian economics or Robert Riech serious.

we take the right wing even less seriously than that.

 

[Bush92]

Whatever the "founders" meant, it was according to their 18th century view.

they were rather incredible then eh? the only thing they didn't count on were folks like the left losing common sense.

lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. Madison merely had a large vocabulary, not any form of understanding of economics.

What planet are you on? Nobody takes Keynesian economics or Robert Riech serious.

we take the right wing even less seriously than that.

Advocates of a socialist economy probably do.

 

[danielpalos]

Whatever the "founders" meant, it was according to their 18th century view.

they were rather incredible then eh? the only thing they didn't count on were folks like the left losing common sense.

lol. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. Madison merely had a large vocabulary, not any form of understanding of economics.

What planet are you on? Nobody takes Keynesian economics or Robert Riech serious.

we take the right wing even less seriously than that.

Advocates of a socialist economy probably do.

especially if we understand economics.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

 

[Slade3200]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

 

[Kondor3]

...nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

Correct.

Democrats are not saying it.

Unfortunately, Democratic policies promote it, without saying it.

And have been... for decades.

Is it any wonder that a Bull$hit Artist like the Orange Creature was able to con his way to power?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

Sadly, I believe that you believe that.
You take the cake for being self manipulated...no doubt

 

[Thinker101]

General welfare to Founders = protection of property, liberty, and community through law and order. Government getting into economics had nothing to do with it.

the clause is general, not common.

Yep, so is sense...dumbass.

 

[Slade3200]

...nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

Correct.

Democrats are not saying it.

Unfortunately, Democratic policies promote it, without saying it.

And have been... for decades.

Is it any wonder that a Bull$hit Artist like the Orange Creature was able to con his way to power?

Sorry man but the bullshit is making up fake quotes and then applying them to a political party’s agenda. Nobody should be taking that shit seriously

 

[Slade3200]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

Sadly, I believe that you believe that.
You take the cake for being self manipulated...no doubt

I could easily say the same thing about you. I’m rubber and your glue argument. I guess we are devolving to that now huh?

 

[bripat9643]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

 

[Ame®icano]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

The answer is simple, if politically unpopular: kill the welfare state in all its forms. Every form of anti-family degeneracy is enabled by knowing that no matter how badly you **** up, Uncle Sam will be there to pick up the tab. Once you know it wont, you'll make better life choices and take responsibility for your actions.

 

[Slade3200]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

i know, what an evil human. I best she loves seeing Americans getting raped and murdered!

 

[bripat9643]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

i know, what an evil human. I best she loves seeing Americans getting raped and murdered!

Apparently she does. She defends the people doing all the raping and murdering.

 

[Slade3200]

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

i know, what an evil human. I best she loves seeing Americans getting raped and murdered!

Apparently she does. She defends the people doing all the raping and murdering.

I know... amazing that somebody so evil could make it so high in our government. What do you think we should do? Tar and feather? Stone?

 

[bripat9643]

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

i know, what an evil human. I best she loves seeing Americans getting raped and murdered!

Apparently she does. She defends the people doing all the raping and murdering.

I know... amazing that somebody so evil could make it so high in our government. What do you think we should do? Tar and feather? Stone?

It doesn't amaze me at all. I think hanging is too good for her.

 

[Slade3200]

you are right... and surprisingly enough even today nobody is saying "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed”

They sure as hell are. Piglosi even defended MS-13

i know, what an evil human. I best she loves seeing Americans getting raped and murdered!

Apparently she does. She defends the people doing all the raping and murdering.

I know... amazing that somebody so evil could make it so high in our government. What do you think we should do? Tar and feather? Stone?

It doesn't amaze me at all. I think hanging is too good for her.

yeah totally. What would you want to see done?

 

[dblack]

The clause is a limitation on the taxation power, nothing more. Arguments to the contrary are just statists trying to wring a more federal power out of the Constitution.

 

[Questioner]

T

Everyone in America is under a system of "welfare" - that's what the Common Law system is. Anyone who wishes to "abolish" welfare or some inane, feel-good proposal like that would have to start by abolishing the common law system, and I don't see anyone serious about doing it except in childish fantasy, let alone the differences between theory and practice on that one.

Beyond that, I refuse to engage in any "welfare" discussions anymore, given that they are generally false and are merely misinformation or propaganda, based on visceral or emotional reactions, not facts - actually researching the history of government spending from day 1 up unto the present day would be an interesting project though.

It's time to get back to basics and what made us great...When our framers said "general welfare" they certainly didn't mean "pay Mexico's citizens to ruin our nation" or "pay ShaQuita to have babies and smoke more weed"

In practice it's a moot point, government has funded numerous individuals and services since it's inception - including the internet and sciences - people will argue that general welfare didn't include bailing out bankers either. No one is actually willing to research government funding since day one up unto the present day.

Not to mention the difference between state and federal; the "general welfare clause", to the best of my knowledge applied to the federal, not the states.

So as usual, this and other arguments are just childish appeals to emotions, and not worth discussing. Benefit systems don't allow people to buy weed, people who want to smoke weed will do that on their own.

A lot of the originalist arguments I've heard simply aren't sound, nor even correct per originalism (e.x. some have tried to argue for quasi-originalism related to gun control, saying that the founders only originally meant 18th century firearms, but this isn't a sound argument).

The 1st Amendment doesn't give people the right to use 'fighting words on the internet', for example.