If burning money is "depriving others of it permanently", then when banks issue currency (e.g. quantitative easing), they are supplying money to others permanently. Logically, it would seem that if you are against the destruction of currency, then you should be a proponent of banks creating as much currency as possible. Obviously it's not that simple and currency is not the same as 'value', so it's overly simplistic to think purely in terms of creation/destruction.
You could argue that they theoretically increased the value of everyone else's money but the actual amount is so infinitesimal it would just add insult to injury. The vast majority of the money in existence is just numbers in bank databases, actual cash is a small fraction and burning an even smaller fraction of that does absolutely nothing beneficial to anyone.
If there was a bank that just continually created new money and gave debt to everyone, then do you believe that they are creating value and presumably a society could exist purely from the value created by these numbers?
Rich people stock way more money (percentage-wise) out of circulation (like in real estate property, tax havens, jewlery, and so on) than working and middle class people - which spend almost all the money they make. For many rich what they actually spend and re-circulate, is a tiny slither of their income (much less their overall wealth).
Not to mention the externalities destroying the environment and societal value from spending money in certain ways (from flying across the world in your private jet, to throwing money at taking people out of actual productive work to cater to your BS fancies like building you an olympic sized pool and organizing BS parties for your friends, to influencing politics and law with your money outside of the democratic process).
>What they don't do is set it on fire, thereby depriving others of it permanently.
Nothing in that case was "deprived from others permanently". Those KLF guys still bought things they needed, and paid for them - just with other money.
They didn't destoy actual value or stole anything. What they did is basically the same as if they just didn't spend their money (and kept it in a safe or under the matress).
Not to mention they've helped with lowering inflation!
What they don't do is set it on fire, thereby depriving others of it permanently.