This is not an argument, and you have provided no evidence for your claims. There are numerous studies, and indeed meta-analyses of these[1][2] indicating that

This is not an argument, and you have provided no evidence for your claims. There are numerous studies, and indeed meta-analyses of these[1][2] indicating that cash transfers can have a positive outcome for recipients. These interventions are broadly positive, so why oppose them? Whether or not it "solves" poverty is a different question to whether the effect is positive or not. There are a number of extremely different arguments as to why poverty can't be solved by cash transfers e.g. essentialising poverty as a moral failing (I strongly disagree), or a critique of the system which creates poverty in the first place (I broadly agree). I can understand why belief in the first kind would lead to opposition of interventions, but engaging with evidence is important in reaching a conclusion. [1]: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w32779.pdf https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32779/w327... [2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-021-01252-z