Feel free to ask me why, or you can continue to presume. I'll have to make whatever presumptions I can as you've chosen not to illuminate me.
Starvation only came up because somehow this turned into a welfare debate. You refuse to accept that there is a good reason state welfare exists, even if it is a "lesser evil" solution, and that it is a natural consequence of capitalism without conscience in a human population.
Even if there is a good reason for state welfare (hell saving lives is a good thing, I can agree with that), this is NOT what your proposal is about, as I've mentioned above.
I want your reaction on the paradox I've pointed out: you claim your proposal is for poor, starving people and yet you want to give the same amount of money to everyone, including people who don't need it. Doesn't make much sense.
Really it almost seems that you're exploiting poverty for your profit.