Nice post is right, E.
I think you also have to be careful here when you talk of rich states helping poor states. It quickly becomes construed as international socialism, and there are some people -- particularly those who think they've earned their status -- who think socialism is a bad idea at the family level, an atrocity at the national level, and the end of the world at a global level.
Well it's not like certain experiments from the past haven't proved them right. Take communism in eastern Europe.
I'm a wealthy man and I've worked hard for that. I worked while my neighbors were drinking and moaning how they have no money. Communists come, take most of my wealth and share it equally to 10 parts. 1 for me and 9 for those neighbors of mine.
And ok, I have no choice so I must accept it. Then all 10 of us start working in the same state company. I work hard, I smartly spend and save my money. They come at work late, drink coffee and beer at work for 3/4 of the working time. The company is not making any profit, the state is taking loans to pay our wages (which are equal). Then after 10 years I again have lots of money while my neighbors and co-workers splashed most of them in bars.
Shall I share everything again?
In Yugoslavia, Slovenia (had 1/10 of Yugoslavia's population and 1/10 of its territory) was contributing with 47% in the budget, but it had to be shared equally and the Slovenians were getting 10% for them. Macedonia was contributing with 6% and they also got 10% for them (same population and territory as Slovenia).
No wonder the Slovenians wanted out of Yugoslavia, were the first ones who went out of Yugoslavia and are now among the richest European countries and only ex-Yu state in the EU.
Those guys work, they're disciplined, while the southerns want to drink and sing while the Slovenians work.