the demonstratable problem with "helping the poor leapfrog"...
the demonstratable problem with "helping the poor leapfrog" is the unfortunate tendency of the poor to fail to continue keeping up the moment the "help" is removed. The spending on "poor" (for simplicity just going back to the protestors who demanded increased "aid" instead of Apollo expenditures) has increased to many times the entire Moon program expenses per year. Many people who were unemployed or unemployable in the 60's now share a home (or case number) with their never-employed adult grandchildren. Even during the boom times of the Dot Com here in Silicon Valley, social services expenditures (for actual client services as well as developing the means to deliver those services to an ever expanding demand) were still increasing hand over fist. Economy going up? the dependent class increases. Economy sucking? The demand for services increases. When things improve? The *increase* in demand is all that slows.
You can lead a horse to water, but as long as there is a mechanism that he gets sufficient water to survive no matte what, you cannot make the horse work. Nor can you make the horse learn. Access to educational resources that would break the poverty cycle is available over most of America, but they're not being taken advantage of.
In America at least, the *attitude* and *culture* are the greatest drivers of poverty. And seeing how badly American Cultural Imperialism...err..Pollution (Indian Idol, television and movies preferred over activity and actual experience, and the search for Wealth Uber Alles) has infected India and much of the civilized world, I suspect the attitude problem will need to be surmounted before any number of shiny subsidized tech toys will make a true difference.