There may be some of that but I think you’re misunderstanding the predominant conservative view, which has two crucial parts:

1. Most conservatives believe that the government forcibly taking your money via taxes and using it for purposes you do not approve of is undemocratic and immoral. This is the root of the small government argument - that the government should only do the things that are broadly supported by the population and since the population is fragmented the set of things that enjoy near universal support are very small.

2. Most conservatives believe very deeply that human dignity is found in freedom, independence, and meaningful work. Some might say “meaningful life” instead but for many conservatives they believe very literally that doing something that matters is the reason for living and if you aren’t doing anything that matters then you will be miserable and have no dignity. It isn’t even about making money - though that can help make the work meaningful. For many they would say that what matters is being able to contribute to your community and take care of your friends and family, and if you do a job that sucks but it’s what you’ve got and it gives you the money to contribute and take care of the people who rely on you, then THAT is what is meaningful.

So, suppose the proposal is “shall we give this homeless drug addict a home and food and money so their needs are met and put them in additction counseling and treatment and then hope they recover from their addiction, etc.”

Perhaps the liberal argument is “yes that should work for getting most people on their feet, and if it enables some people to just live more comfortably in a drugged stupor then that’s okay because overall everyone will be better off.”

The conservative argument would generally be, (1) it’s immoral to take money from people who work hard and take care of themselves to give it to someone who doesn’t work so they can live comfortably on drugs, and (2) by just giving them everything you are actually taking away the satisfaction and dignity that comes from taking care of yourself and knowing that you are independent and free.

Note also that the conservatives tend to worry a lot about the moral hazard: they fear that any kind of “bailout” whether it’s for homeless people or for Wall Street etc. takes away the consequences of an individuals actions and therefore incentivizes risky, dangerous, or antisocial activity.

Another way to distill it down is to say that liberals tend toward viewing individuals as inherently good and not responsible for bad things that happen to them, and conservatives tend to view people as inherently bad and mostly responsible for both the good and bad that happens to them.

Conservatives tend to see civilization and civil, productive behavior as something very hard earned and fragile, and worry about how social changes like universal social programs and such may undermine civilization - think Brave New World.

What I find most interesting is the economic libertarian argument about such things which is just to do whatever costs the least :)

Anyway, this stuff is all interesting but to boil it all down what I’ve learned over time is that there isn’t really an us or them or right or wrong politically, rather there are mostly rational people who have reasonable justifications for how they think about these problems, and significantly different life experiences that result in significantly different beliefs about what works and what doesn’t, and therefore what politics they subscribe to.