You are welcome to your unsubstantiated opinion. All you need now is an argument to substantiate it.
It is the scope of the power. Our defense clause cannot be any more general than our welfare clause.
Time to remove the cap on earnings and replace it with a floor. No FICA taxes on first $X amount of earnings, then FICA on all the rest. Additionally, time to place FICA taxes on those that derive their wealth from investments also.
All people pay taxes (sales, gas, etc). I see no benefit in taking taxes from people that can't afford basic living expenses while some use their funds for personal space flight. Remember, the poorest among us are unlikely to be able to benefit from the tax advantages of those that are more wealthy (mortgage interest deductions and IRA deductions for example).
I reject the proposition that a few outliers override the benefit to the whole. Do you feel the same way about people born to rich families that do nothing but spend their inherited wealth?
General is pretty specific.
I can't be wrong because that is what our Constitution says. Right-wing fantasy cannot make it mean general warfare and common offense.
tenthamendmentcenter.com
academic.oup.com
Yes, that is true. Our Constitution is express not implied in any way. It promotes the general welfare not the general warfare or common offense.
The general welfare clause is the scope of the authority for powers that are necessary and proper to achieve that End.Here is someone else who pretty much buzz-kills your joyride.
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.
Madison on the Meaning of the “General Welfare,” the “Purpose” of Enumerated Powers, and the “Definition” of Constitutional Government
Abstract. According to James Madison, “the most important and fundamental question” he ever addressed was the meaning of and relation between the general w
Let's see those terrific counter arguments.
Here is someone else who pretty much buzz-kills your joyride.
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.
Madison on the Meaning of the “General Welfare,” the “Purpose” of Enumerated Powers, and the “Definition” of Constitutional Government
Abstract. According to James Madison, “the most important and fundamental question” he ever addressed was the meaning of and relation between the general w
Let's see those terrific counter arguments.
Right, this goes back to--there were two interpretations of the clause almost from the moment it was written. This points heavily to it simply not being a clear-cut black letter piece of law, like much of the constitution it is subjective. Congress through its legislation power has some discretion where the Constitution is unclear, and the people have discretion to punish a Congress who interpret subjective portions of the Constitution contrary to the popular will. We also additionally developed judicial review so that the courts could exercise oversight here as well.