lol what? Do you really believe that nonsense?
Scientific evidence is not a belief. We understand a little bit about economy, you know? It's taught at universities.
The reason circulating money adds to the economy is the assumption that circulating money equals work, and work improves life on the planet.
That's the most stupid bullshit I've read in a long time.
The reason circulating money adds to the economy is that if I spend $100 at your shop, you can now spend $100 on buying something, and the person you buy it from can spend $100 on some service and that person can donate $100 to the poor and they go to ten shops, spending those $100 and those shops come to me to buy something for $100. At the end, the $100 has made a full circle, so no money was created or destroyed and everyone has as much money as they had before, but everyone also got goods or services worth $100 that they didn't have before. Or, in other words: Those $100 of money have turned into $700 of wealth.
That's simplified, of course, ignoring a lot of details, but that's the basic principle.
In reality, if I discover a great unknown artist and give him $100 to paint something, that produces more value than if I give a crappy unknown artist $100 to paint something.
You are clearly confusing cultural value with economic value. Besides, great or crappy in the arts is very often judged long after the artist and the original buyer are both dead.
The question is whether you think stuff like fighting malaria with $1 billion is subjectively worth more than a bunch of poor people spending $1 billion on big screen TVs from China
Again, you are confusing values, in this case moral values with economic values. Those things are not the same.