If it were the other way around, ie, if the apes descended from humans, then the poor would be people whose degree of evolution would still be higher than the rich.
This is not the first time aboard the opposite hypothesis to that of Charles Darwin. (1)
He suggested that humans descended from apes, assuming sobrentendido we are more evolved than apes, while I propose the opposite assumption, while saying that animals are descended from humans, considering they are more perfect than us though tend to think the opposite.
Maybe I should not go so far as to propose that only settle apes descend from us.
The objective of this alternative approach is to think of poverty as a feature of evolution and not a situation that should improve.
If most humans live as poorly as the animals, we might think that such a majority is the set of people who are on a higher evolutionary stage to within several centuries, their descendants become as perfect as the monkeys.
Correspondingly, we can deduce that the non-poor who are present are further away from perfection.
Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): Los animales descienden del ser humano.
(Este es el Artículo Nº 2.183)