the poor don't choose to be poor

Some Christians profess a curious viewpoint on poverty. They say that within an economy of uncontrolled markets, voluntary decisions of many people are the only factors that explain economic results. Therefore, everyone has nobody to blame but themselves. In the competition of buyers and sellers, including when the negotiated items are jobs (i.e. labor, "human resources"), anyone can succeed if only they try.

Ridiculous. Economically speaking, people aren't indistinguishable "commodities" and markets aren't perfectly meritorious or open. That ideal is theoretical, like calculating physics without including friction. People differ in their inborn talents, education, upbringing, and so forth. In any case, markets don't always reward or even consider the most valuable/productive people.

I find it easier to appreciate this point by envisioning an instant switch between the circumstances of my life thus far and the life of someone else. I've received love and encouragement from my social networks (no, I'm certainly not referring to Facebook). I've received a good education. I've received relatively good care of my nutrition and health. I've received ethical and religious instruction.

These are advantages that I could easily assume everyone else also has. However, after swapping my life's advantages for another life's downfalls, can I realistically suppose that I'd achieve the same level of economic "success"?  Don't misunderstand or misconstrue my meaning; I agree that personal initiative and strength of character are hugely important ways to compensate for many formidable obstacles. But can we honestly suppose that every person in the middle class would have still ended in the middle class, had they hypothetically started in a lower class? Do we naively presume that every imagined transplant would grow to a beautiful rose, blossoming regardless to a predetermined height from out of the least nurturing soils? Without the basic skills and interpersonal connections that markets require, someone with the best intentions or a revolutionary idea could still be one of the poor. For that matter, a long string of bad luck can transform the fortunate to the unfortunate.

Of course, this complex reality of a "poverty trap" doesn't lead to the conclusion that the poor can only be economic dependents forever. Rather, when people are caught in traps, the more charitable action is to help them climb out of the trap. And provide sustenance until the assistance allows them to start participating sufficiently in markets in a more independent mode. The aforementioned ideal, income level being a personal decision, is really a goal. Just as Christians cannot force other Christians to seek God (although they can and should encourage/spur/exhort/cajole/discipline/etc), people cannot be forced to put in the necessary effort to earn the economic outcomes which they claim to want. However, charitable Christians will offer every opportunity and support to those people who do. They'll sacrifice their temporal excess resources in order to bless fellow sinners who lack.

Christians administer mercy economically, as they keep in mind the divine mercy they continue to receive. Christians aren't meant to have the mindset, "I've earned every cent I have and you've earned every cent you have. Since we're individuals in a dog-eat-dog and king-of-the-hill world, I and my finances have no relationship whatsoever to you and your finances. Don't complain to me about the markets' rejection of your utter lack of starting capital. You really should have thought of that before you became peasants."