It's an opinion, but "fairly reasonable" is very debatable.

Being poor doesn't mean a person doesn't have principles, just like being wealthy isn't correlated with having strong principles or morals.

It does not mean the poor don't have principles. They definitely do. They cannot afford to live by them, or they lose their livelihood. Indeed it is widely acknowledged in academia. that the poor are much more generous per $ of income than the wealthy. (Will have to search for the reference... Will edit it into the comment later.)

>Indeed it is widely acknowledged in academia. that the poor are much more generous per $ of income than the wealthy.

That seems to be saying that despite having less, the poor are exercising a far more principled life.

“Widely ack’ed in academia” That’s the problem right there. It’s a justified question to ask, does academia really know what being poor is

They aren’t saying poor people revel in their inherent immorality.

They are saying poverty forces people, against their will, to break their moral codes and principles. It’s one of the worst things about the power dynamics of money: not being able to afford an iPhone is a laughably trivial concern compared to having to work instead of spending time with your children, when you know how much of an impact your absence will have on them, for example.

I was glad to read it as a pithy and sobering comment, even if I didn’t agree with the rest of the post.

The phrase doesn't mean the poor don't have principles, it means they don't have the same luxury of making decisions purely on principle.