[justshutupandtakeit]

I am not sure if that is an accurate reading of Hamilton's beliefs since I have not seen that specific contention in his writings. It could be since the phrase "general welfare" was put into the constitution for a purpose. The opposite reading means that it is irrelevent. Why would it have been put in there if there were not a general welfare to be concerned about?

[Deliberator]

the phrase "general welfare" was put into the constitution for a purpose.

A likelier interpretation than Hamilton's is that it was another restrictive phrase, ruling out spending that benefitted special interests. That this phrase was a broad grant of power in an otherwise restrictive clause, and in a section listing numerous specific powers that certainly fall within "general welfare" and are thus redundant under Hamilton's reading, is simply ludicrous.