I’m not qualified to judge the technical merits of the paper, but their conclusion seems plausible. They concluded that in an illiterate rural population, there did seem to be a threshold effect in asset levels above which it seemed much easier to progress economically. But it’s unclear to me how applicable this is to the poor in the US or other developed economies, particularly when we’re talking about a population…
I grew up well below the poverty line in the USA and it was pretty self evident that I was not leading the same kind of lifestyle as someone in poverty in a developing country.
I think your point is mostly true but I'm also just not sure how useful it is.