Too often I hear poverty lifted up as some sort of virtue. It is not. There are dangers with poverty as there are dangers with abundance. If one is poor, it is possible to dishonor God's name because you think you have to steal to survive. With poverty, you would have nothing to share with people. Living out in a field with your shopping cart limits what you can do to help others. You would not have a cup of water to give, or a coat, or home to invite others to for a study of God's Word.
Just recently I read something from a highly respected preacher who wrote that he would rather his hearers had nothing but the love of God in their heart rather then having a growing abundance and a coolness to eternal things. Of course, when he puts it that way, I agree. But does it have to be one way or the other? Why can't people have a spiritual vitality AND a certain amount of means? It would make more sense to me. Because as a person has some wealth at his disposal, he is able to give, take care of his family, and help out with the church and special needs.
If you are in poverty, you are someones mission field. You need to have others spend their resources and time on you. Instead of good coming out from you, you are having to receive all the time. I don't see that as a worthy goal in life.