They also envisioned an economy where most of what people used would be produced locally, and goods would be relatively generic. They didn't envision an economy where things people used would be produced across the country or across the world, and processed brands replace generic staple goods.
So in your opinion the Commerce Clause is fully validated in any application ?
I doubt that's true. Why did Jefferson write into the Declaration of Independence:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:They were very aware of regional growth of fruits and vegetables, wheat and corn, cotton and barley, fish, trees, coal and sulfur, granite and limestone, etc.
They didn't expect the regions to horde what they had; they expected them to trade what they had to obtain what they did not have.
-PJ
I am sure we agree that once the Court began to apply made up tests, such as whether an activity had an "impact on commerce" or an "effect on commerce," the commerce clas Use became so misshapen that Congress siezed the power to prohibit growing a crop for the owner's own use, i.e. Wickard v Filburn (Congress passed the Agricultural Adjustmen Act so that it could balance the forces of supply and demand in the same manner as Soviet Russia, while the NYT suppressed its awareness of the holomodor, but I digress)
All that being said, the nature of the commerce passing over state borders, whether it be harvested crops or Amazon packages containing electronics, should really not be a salient factor.
They also envisioned a moral and religious people