Are you seriously arguing that paying to ensure old people aren’t in poverty does not count as spending on “the general welfare”? Does anything more directly contribute to happiness and success than a cash payment?
Happiness and success has nothing to do with money. Prosperity is something earned, not taken from others except by criminal activity.
The argument you’re making sounds like a ridiculous distortion of the English language.
I used the definition of those words as they stood at the time the Constitution was written. The distorted definitions are what is in use today, not as what was the intent of the Founding Fathers and the people of the time.
For intent of the Founding Fathers, look to the preamble of the Constitution. It says "...,
promote the general welfare, ..."
What would be an example of the “general welfare” if not literally spending on welfare?
Oh, I would say providing roads, delivering mail, guarding the borders, fighting fires, keeping the seaways open, dredging harbors, creating needful forts, coining money at a set rate to provide for honest and fair trading, and on, and on, and on.
Remember, the word "welfare" has taken on more or other meanings since the Constitution was ordained and established.
The bottom lie here is that the government is taking more money from wage earners than is needed to run the system each year and pays out less and less to the recipients each year. Who profits here? Yup. The government. Who are the bad guys here? Not the wage earners being fleeced, not those on social security being cheated - it's the government, plain and simple.
I've made my points here. I didn't have to prevaricate, assassinate character, misconstrue, demean, exaggerate, nor bully. I only hope all have gained a bit of insight into this unfair system that no one in Congress will address.
Woody