I am a scientist, not a sociologist, so feel free to take my opinion with a grain of salt. Also, I live in the U.S., for context.
Poor, uneducated people remain poor and uneducated because the education system relies on local tax income in order to fund schools. So, neighborhoods of the working poor remain poor due to inferior education. The poor are not genetically inferior, they are simply suppressed by social policies.
Secondly, social safety net programs such as welfare, are a mere band-aid applied to keep the peasants from revolting. They exist for the protection of the privileged.
It's interesting that welfare accounts for 10-13% of the U.S. budget, while education sits at a constant 3%. A shunting of welfare spending into education would increase the number of useful people produced by the education system.
For the record, I come from a poor family, though never poor enough to rely on welfare. I did eat my fair share of mustard sandwiches for dinner. However, I was fortunate enough to go to a good school that was fed by families, of which 95% were much wealthier than mine. I graduated at the top of my class, and as far as I know I'm the only one about to attain a PhD. Wealth does not ensure good genetics, neither does poverty exclude them.
Stop throwing scraps to the rats, and they'll set their eyes on larger prey.