What exactly are the government's responsibilities with regards to the Constitution?

Question

I know that it mentions that the government should provide for the general welfare of its citizens, but where is the line constitutionally drawn between capitalism and socialism?

Answer 1

There is no "line" between capitalism and socialism.  The Framers of the Constitution were concerned with crafting a document that would protect individual rights while providing a framework for an effective government.

They wern't concerned with the right-wing fixation on "socialism"--the word dindn't even exist in 1788.  Not that the right-wing would know that. They are so wound up in their own ideology that they obviously never bother to read the Constitution--or they would know it doesn't address their petty concerns.

Nor would the Framers have been interested if "socialism" had even existed at the time. They would have realized--as any EDUCATED person today knows--that both socialism and capitalism are economic, not political systems--and that a mix of the two is not only not a contradiction, it is an inevitable necessity.

Answer 2

If you read the Constitution, your question will be answered.  The Constitution shows just what Government is supposed to do and not do.  Including the regulation of trade.  Where the line is drawn is where it says that if not Specifically stated in the Constitution, than government shall have no authority in a particular area.

Answer 3

Here is what one of the guys who put it together has to say:

"The capital and leading object of the Constitution was to leave with the States all authorities which respected their own citizens only and to transfer to the United States those which respected citizens of foreign or other States; to make us several as to ourselves, but one as to all others." — Thomas Jefferson to William Johnson, 1823

So if we proceed by that original intention, if any State wants to implement a welfare program, subject to the will of that State's citizens, fine, but it was never intended for the federal government to do so. The Constitution was constructed to limit the federal government; the founders had much sad experience with the consequences of remote, centralized power.

Answer 4

The Constitution does not mandate any particular economic system.  Capitalism as we know it today grew out of the mercantilism of the 1700s.  It is not carved in stone.  In fact the way we look at capitalism vs socialism changes over time.

Neither capitalism nor socialism exist in their pure state.  Every modern, developed country is some combination of both. We waver back and forth, more capitalism sometimes, more socialism sometimes.  We move towards socialism at times when we feel capitalism has failed us, like in the early 1930s, and again now.  Capitalism gets out of hand, it overreaches, and socialism comes in to rescue us, then we go back to capitalism.

Answer 5

The 3 branches of government are supposed to support and defend the Constitution.  But they don't.

Providing for the general welfare as mentioned in the Preamble was never intended to mean the government was to engage in welfare of any kind.

Answer 6

Against direct rule by the people.

So I guess you get to decide which gives you less control.

The Constitution set up a system of government, not an economic system.  Jefferson say America as a "Nation of yeoman farmers and craftsmen."

Those who want restrictions on liberal individual actions, also want to remove restrictions on liberal economic actions.

to quote an old movie: "that don't make no sense."

Answer 7

See link below