Also, one final note on the subject is that the correlation is a LOT more understandable when you think about it.
That is, that Conservative states take in more then they pay on average.
Public policy belief is based largely on local conditions.
The thing is, poor people aren't a majority in any state, let alone welfare recipients.(to my knowledge)
In the South there are more poor people due to essentially the South never bouncing back fully from the Civil War.
In a place by Mississippi, people see way more poor. Way more then they could ever hope to take care of using their own money (hence why they receive money) hence the situation looks worse then it is.
Meanwhile some Demcoratic States like Road Island see fewer poor people, and as such support the saftey net because it seems like we could easily take care of these people. Making the situation look rosier then it is.
While others like California see a lot of poor, but also see a lot of super rich people due to hollywood, silicon valley and a lot of other things... and overestimate the power and number of the super rich.
Myself, I don't think we should be cutting benefits to people, reform the hell out of the system so that we waste less money in administration by having dozens and dozens of welfare administrations, but keep funding the same or near it, and hopefully increase benefits.
However, that's been a hard position to keep since moving to Nevada where the poor are more numerous and what I think likely has to have the highest homelessness rate in the country. Partly due to just the number, and partly due to there just being so many people who seem to be poor out of choices. (ex, the Crystal Meth Users that constantly come into where i work to gamble away their last few dollars.
