The problem is that you think that poverty can be solved by the government giving money to everyone (UBI) and/or by building homes for the homeless. But history clearly proves that no matter how much money the government has spent in an effort to reduce poverty, the only real reduction in poverty has been the result of capitalism.
Here are two things…
A. Doing better things with society’s limited resources
B. Doing worse things with society’s limited resources
The first creates better options and the second destroys them. In a market we can all decide for ourselves whether somebody is doing better or worse things with society’s limited resources. We give our money to the people doing better things with society’s limited resources. This gives them more power/control/influence than the people doing worse things with society’s limited resources. Better options are created and poverty is reduced.
What you want to do is disregard the results of the market process. You want to give yourself more influence than society believes that you truly deserve. Rather than gain influence by endeavoring to do better things with society’s limited resources, you simply want to take more influence.
Let’s imagine if Medium was a market. Readers could easily spend their money on the best stories. We would all see and know the total value of each story. The most valuable stories would be displayed on the homepage. Your stories aren’t displayed on the homepage because they aren’t very valuable. Your stories don’t provide others with very much benefit. But rather than endeavor to improve your stories, you just want to bypass all the hard work and simply cheat in order to have your stories be displayed on the homepage.
In all cases it’s a problem when your influence doesn’t equal your benefit to society. It means that you either have too much or too little influence. The result is society’s limited resources aren’t used as beneficially as they could be… which means less prosperity and more poverty.