No, it's comes down to intelligence and making the right choices. A person who's born into wealth can lose everything easily and a person who's born into squalor can rise out of it.

Here's a homeless girl who managed to graduate HS and go to harvard

http://abcnews.go.com/US/abandoned-teen-dawn-loggins-graduates-homeless-custodian-harvard/story?id=16520080

Here's another homeless girl who graduated HS and went to harvard

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/24/khadijah-williams-homeless-harvard_n_4493490.html

This is what homeless can make if they use their mind in other ways

http://residentiallychallenged.blogspot.com/2012/06/how-much-does-panhandler-really-make.html

If someone has been poor their whole life, most likely it's their fault.

The definition is highly concerned with background equality. One of (admittedly several) definitons of fair, according to Dictionary.com:

Fair: "Without cheating or gaining an unjust advantage."

What I (and I believe OP) are referring to is that particular definition of the word. Fair, as we're using it, pertains to ensuring that no one has any sort of "unjust" advantage coming into a game, a competition, or in this case, life. As the world stands currently, billions of people are put at an unjust (which is simply a lack of what is morally right) disadvantage due to the world's past, i.e. colonialism, slavery, and simply where they are born. Thus, it is not "fair." That is all we're saying.

What makes the destitute not destitute? Production. How do we increase production? By accumulating capital and freeing labor. Which countries in the world have the lowest rates of destitution? Those with relatively free markets. First world capitalism isn't the problem plaguing third world countries, third world socialism is. An example of how proliferated markets lead to people who aren't starving to death is China. All can preach about how so much fairer having the state owning the means of production is, but the end result is the reversal of going from 80% of the world's population being destitute to only 20% since the industrial revolution. Ask Venezuela,Cuba, North Korea, etc how faIr their systems are.

You're using exceptions to attempt to disprove a rule. Poor children are far less likely to be able to attend quality schools or receive any sort of reliable tutoring from their parents. They are also far, far more likely to live in dangerous neighborhoods. As a result, they usually learn far less, they are able to focus far less on school, meaning that they are far less qualified to compete in the workplace. Their parents likely won't be rich enough to send them to college. Due to this they get low paying jobs, never make enough money to escape the low income status, and the cycle repeats. Over 70% of kids born poor stay poor throughout their entire life. 

Sure, there will ocassionally be the exceptional student who is gifted enough to overcome those obstacles, but the vast majority of kids aren't. I've worked with low income public schools before, and trust me, the idealized "American dream" (or Western Dream depending on where you live) is not attainable for everyone.

I think there needs to be a distinction between urban poverity (which has a strong cultural component and the debalitating drug war involved) and poverty independent of urban problems. You will find that people who are poor, but don't grow up in either extremely urban nor extremely rural areas have plenty of opportunites. In fact, the top ten students in my high school were nowhere near the top income-wise, half were poor like myself, with the other half being lower-middle class. 

Never suggested it. Your comment seemed very Trump-like. 

I'm attempting prove that there is no rule that people have to remain poor. It's literally their choice. 

Try saying that to the girls in India who have sex in order to get $$$

. Exceptions to the rule... Also, no Harvard in the poorest countries, is there? And a random link that jumps from $1.90 a day to a $500,000 home.... Please. Just read what I said, then reply. 

I would tell her or them save up money and relocate. They have an out. People have choices. 

She can get away, go to school, get job, enjoy new life, find a decent guy, have a family, raise kids and send 'em to school so they can have a good life.

Most people in her situation choose a different route.

Doesn't save money, doesn't think, stays there, does drugs, drinks, has kids from random people, doesn't take care of kids, gets sick, can't afford meds and eventually dies. Kids have to survive on their own and most likely will repeat most of her life choices unless they use their intelligence to get a better life.