I know the road example is a little more extreme, but then no less extreme than those people who scream SOCIALISM. So if my analogy is worthless, it's worth every bit as those claims of this administration being 'Socialist.'
There is a lot of loose ends in the Constitution and its interpretation in the court of law, in particular cases has been interpreted in a number of ways.
The issue of taxation and what it is used for is both explicit and implicit. Providing for the common defense is in there, postal service, and 'post roads'.
Taxes are levied to provide for the General Welfare of the society.
How that is interpreted is contingent upon how someone reads it.
Subsidies for big business, which you and me both seem to be against, would not in my view be promoting the general welfare of society.
However, both Bush and Obama saw things differently as did their closest advisers. They believed it would promote social welfare by reducing unemployment.
I beg to differ about Veterans benefits. Yes, the VA system is wonderful - but there are still people out there who served, who still endure the trauma of war, and are still living in the streets. It's not a strict Constitutional right that these people be taken in off the streets, but it's the right thing to do.