Taxation has vastly different impacts between federal and state. States don't have the ability to create money on demand as the federal government does, so they depend upon taxation for their sole support.

Taxation at the federal level, including income, Social Security, Medicare, or any "revenue" to the government does nothing except draw down excess money in the banking system. It cannot "pay for" anything as it first encounters the debt that created it and is cancelled by that.

When welfare programs are federally funded they serve dual purpose. They furnish relief for citizens experiencing hardship, but they can also pump federal money into areas that are experiencing more widespread hardship, such as industrial/business relocation. This injection of currency supports supply chains that, as we have seen in the pandemic, are more fragile than we once thought and collapse in a cascade effect.

Almost all nations currently use a sovereign fiat currency that means it is available to the issuer in unlimited supply, regardless of that country's revenue position. To argue what a currency issuer can "afford" to do for its citizens is a fallacy of construct as long as the goods and services the spending is meant to deploy exist or potentially exist and are priced in the unit of account of the currency issuer.

If such currency issuing nations focus on their ability to produce the goods and services needed in their economy their ability to distribute those goods and services via money creation is not enhanced by drawing money from the economy where it is "in motion" (velocity) in the supply chain.

There is no "infinity+1" in math or accounting that requires such a balance of revenue and spending. If we can elect people who have a grasp on econ at the federal level, ridding politics of the "kitchen table" budget mentality, we will find our society becoming more productive via investments in education and infrastructure that provide a stable economy not prone to bubbles and busts.