Not disagreeing, just trying to add some complexion.
Poverty may even trigger creativity at times. But stress is the major impediment, and therefore living in long-term poverty does not favor sustained creativity.
I grew up in Norway; incidentally, one of the most famous Norwegian novels is the semi-autobiographical "Sult" (literally "Hunger") by Knut Hamsun, describing a young writers descent into madness as the hunger grips him as he wanders around in what is now Oslo.
But I've also seen the flip side, where you spend so much time worrying about money or acquiring a semblance of security that everything else gets pushed aside.
"I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain.”
Like Maslow's hierarchy of needs... generally people have to expend their creative thought on how to provide for themselves before they have the opportunity to use that thought in more expansive ways.
Do a Dan Price and you jump start people's ability to settle the lower levels of needs and be able to make more choices.
But then again, we will never know about extremely creative yet poor people who are struggling to make ends meet and wasting their precious mental energy on things others take for granted.
But that does not discredit the original point (to which I was agreeing), that being poor is not an impediment to creativity.