I'm arguing that literally any limit on cash given to poor people is a paternalistic overstep because we do not do the same for the cash we give to rich people.

I'm arguing that literally any limit on cash given to poor people is a paternalistic overstep because we do not do the same for the cash we give to rich people. The metaphor is 'Why do we tell poor people that this $1 can only be spent on certain types of food' when we don't say ' This $1 of pork barrel spending can't be used on CEO bonuses unless that CEO submits to regular drug testing.' I don't know why this is such a hard concept? Maybe you & I just give up?