That's not how banks work. You go in and deposit a check they give you a receipt which tells you what day the deposit will post and when the full amount of the funds will be available. You are, again, functionally complaining that a checking account can't be used to force a bank to give you an interest free loan and justifying it by saying "desperately need [...] food or basic amenities."
Your economic model is simplistic. People with no marketable skill or knowledge are not having the value they create stolen from them. The value that comes from the businesses they work at comes from the founders, the investors, the people who had the idea, who developed the product and so on.
Considering I grew up in abject poverty, I'm sorry but I'm not going to let remarks like that fly. That doesn't deserve a pass.
B) The inability to produce enough to sustain yourself is the basis for defining poverty.
As for your second point, calling 'profit and productivity irrelevant' is ridiculously flippant because profit and productivity doesn't come from the void. It's generated by people. So let me illustrate:
Person A is 'creating' $1000/year in value.
Person B is 'short' $300/year in order to survive.
Person A employs Person B. The reason why Person B is short of funds is because Person A is earning their value from Person B and not properly distributing that wealth down through labor to Person B. Ergo, the situation isn't some sort of 'wealth transfer', it's the result of someone not being fairly compensated for their work.
What you're calling 'wealth transfer' is the result of money accumulating towards the top, which results in the wealthy having to either pay more to support the bottom percent or let them die. Software engineers generate many more times their income in value to the companies that employ them. Which means money floats to the top as companies try to depress wages to maximize profit margins.