
Well, the fact of the matter is that poverty is imperfectly related to 
social and political instability, while economic inequality is much more
strongly related.  In virtually all major revolutions including
England (the Puritan revolution), France, Russia and China, the 
revolutions occurred as economies were undergoing substantial long term 
growth and poverty was declining.  What sets off revolutions is massive
inequality coupled with a perception on the part of those at the bottom
that social change is possible.

If "poverty (were) the main engine of social instability," this typical
historical pattern would not hold.  In fact, revolutions would have been
far more typical before the nineteenth century than since that time.

[Much deleted...]


Sorry, buddy, but some other "blowhards" managed to include the "general
welfare" in another portion of the constitution.

Article I Section 8: "The Congress shall have the power to lay and collect
taxes...to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and GENERAL
WELFARE of the United States..."

I guess they wanted to make sure everyone understood they meant what they
said in the preamble.


But as noted above, the constitution doesn't say that, does it?


But since it explicitly includes both the general welfare and defense
in Article I, Section 8, I guess you'll grant that botha are constitutional
functions.  Right?

jsh