It is not an accusation. It is a finding about what was missing from your file. Almost everyone reads that sentence as a judgement about them, when it is a standard phrase that means the evidence did not satisfy the officer on that point.
The line to notice is the other one. "Accomplished the original purpose of your stay" is the officer saying your reason to be here looks finished. That is the point to answer, and most people never notice it. If you are applying to stay longer, the application has to show a new and genuine purpose, not the old one restated.
Four things decide a temporary-resident decision like this: the purpose of the stay, your ties and obligations outside Canada, your immigration history and compliance, and whether the plan makes sense as a whole. Money on its own is not one of them.
Before reapplying, read the officer's notes if you have them, because they say exactly which of the four was not satisfied. Answer that one properly rather than sending the same file with more pages.
This is community experience, not legal advice. For your own file, speak to a licensed consultant or lawyer.