That is something I can relate to, being a person who grew up in such a social-economic status. It was always a preconceived notion that simple decisions are compounded by the limit of resources to solve them.
I look forward to what is next from Servant-Leadership
I don't know if this is correct or not - but I'm annoyed that they didn't collect data to support their conclusion. They refer to the cash infusion to the poor in Uganda and that their income was still up in four years. They go on to say it could be due to a simple return on investment or maybe the recipients make better decisions. But they don't provide any evidence to support either conclusion. If you want to assert the hypothesis that the author asserts, then do a study to prove or disprove your hypothesis. In this case they should have some method of rating decision making and see if that rating goes up/down/stays the same when an individual moves from one socioeconomic class to another with a relatively large sample size. As I stated earlier I really don't know if the hypothesis is correct, and this article while implying that it is true, really doesn't provide any evidence to support their assertion. This is not good science.