It is by definition not someone else’s money if they don’t have legal claim to it. Federal funds going towards the general welfare is something our nation was founded on. You seem to have the intuitive understanding that wealth ought to belong to the people who put in the labor to create it, not the people who set themselves up through legal machinations to receive it without working, and I agree. The capital owner class shouldn’t exist.
When you as an individual demand money from the government you are demanding that other people's money be given to you personally. That's covetous.
There is general welfare such as roads and bridges, a strong defense etc. And there is individual welfare.
Our nation was NOT founded on welfare as it is seen today. It was founded on freedom and individual responsibility with limited government. Welfare as we see it today didn't happen until the 1930s. In the time of the founding aid to the poor was left to the states and local governments. Often it consisted of assigning those who were indigent work. Or if disabled etc they were placed in alms houses or things if that nature. They didn't pay single moms to stay home. I'd you were able bodies you were expected to work and sometimes you were assigned to people to work for. Even road building by the federal government was questioned.
President Monroe echoed Madison’s views, and added some of his own, in vetoing a bill for maintaining the Cumberland Road in 1822. He denied that Congress had the power to do this. “If the power exist,” he said, “it must be either because it has been specifically granted to the United States or that it is incidental to some power which has been granted. If we examine the specific grants of power we do not find it among them, nor is it incidental to any power which has been specifically granted.” Among those from which he could not trace the power, he declared, was the clause “to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare.”[8] In an addendum to his veto message, he included this thought: “Have Congress a right to raise and appropriate the money to any and to every purpose according to their will and pleasure? They certainly have not. The Government of the United States is a limited Government, instituted for great national purposes, and for those only.”[9]
Madison said this:
If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress…. Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”
So no welfare as you and others refer to it as was NOT the intent of the founding of this country. Not of the constitution.
Jefferson said this:
Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated.
They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose. To consider the latter phrase not as describing the purpose of the first, but as giving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please…. Certainly no such universal power was meant to be given them. It was intended to lace them up straightly within the enumerated powers and those without which, as means, these powers could not be carried into effect.
That of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.
You have a woeful understanding of history.
Upvote
0