>>6
Read what I said again. The fed would drop out of the equation. If the states want to take up taxing and spending, they would be free to do it.
As for the poor, they are fucked no matter what happens. However, having the federal government off their backs would be an improvement. True, the taking away of federal largesse would hurt some of them, but those are the people who largely need to be hurt by the denial of the Welfare State.
>>9
I already established that the Red States being primarily federal recipient states would SEEM to have a lot to lose at first, but overall their taking over of federal lands (with wood, grazing, mining and OIL) would more than make up for that.