Is it really though?
If someone is really in this poor of a financial situation, I'd bet that it could actually be worse to receive money day by day. This gives them access to use it prior to when larger bills are typically due: the start or end of the month.
That is, if you get paid on the 31st, you'll have that full paycheck available to pay your loan, mortgage/rent, car, phone service, and so on on that day or within the next few days. Then you have the rest leftover to blow.
Day by day payments involve control and making sure you are setting aside enough.
Have you ever noticed how excited people in this situation are for "payday", since they're able to go buy stuff? Now, every day is payday with the associated temptations.
If you get $300 on the 1st or you get $10 a day you'll have the same amount on the 30th. If that amount is less than your monthly expenses you're in trouble and payday loans start to look attractive.
A lot of people in the seedier parts of time are working jobs that don't pay a livable wage, and a lot of people are also spending more than what they should be. Sometimes irresponsibly, sometimes out of necessity (see: the boot theory of economics).
Paying irresponsible people more often will exacerbate their problems.
Paying poor people more often won't make them not poor any more.
We're talking about a lucrative industry that exists around extracting money from the poorest people. And most of it has to do with them waiting to be paid for work they've already done.