This would only be the determining factor if you believe that California on its own would not vote for the federal government providing support for the lowest income people.
The evidence seems to indicate that is not the case.
They wouldn't as much as they are forced to now, especially if they were an independent country (which is the only fair comparison).
There's also efficiencies of density that you just don't get in Mississippi, but that also pays off as a redistribution within states from cities to the suburbs and countryside.
