So more people is better than less people? In a few decades when world population is 9 or 10 billion the world will automatically be "better off".
Kansas population was 2.8 million, according to my 2011 atlas. So I guess Kansas would be "better off" with 5,000,000 and then be even better off with 28 million people and be even better off with 280 million people and then be even way better off with 2.8 billion people.
Seems to me though that people sorta follow jobs. People with $40,000 a year jobs will often move on to $50,000 a year jobs and leave a state doing so. But people with $40,000 a year jobs or even $30,000 a year jobs don't generally sit around and go "this state sucks with this Republican legislature, I am gonna quit my job, sell my house and move to Missouri and look for a job."
Of course, I did that in Iowa. I quit my $17,000 a year temp job because I got a job in Missouri. This at a time when the Democratic Governor of Iowa, Mr. Thomas Vilsack, was all concerned about a "future labor shortage" in Iowa. Then it turned out I could not afford to buy a house in Missouri with said job, so I ended up living in Kansas. Then I got fired from said job and ended up working part-time for $12,000 a year. So I kinda lost money to leave Iowa, and further, I lost about $25,000 on real estate when I left Iowa.
But your post sorta makes Brownback's point. Even though Kansas has a lower unemployment rate than Texas, the Kansas economy has not been creating enough jobs. But I would create jobs by investing in Kansas, making a 4 lane highway and a new four year university in the West, for example, whereas his plan is to create jobs by throwing money at rich people.