More generally, if what you're looking at is a cemetery for the poor, there should be a lot of remains, and there shouldn't be much in the way of decoration. If someone carved a tomb for the remains to be in ("The body was interred in a ceramic pot within a rock-cut tomb"), that already disqualifies them from being poor.
You are wrong to think that the majority of Egyptians’ corpses were disposed of in the Nile.
To advance the argument that a pot burial likely didn't indicate a poor burial.
So what, this didn't happen and isn't consistent with any historical practice. An irrelevant non-sequitur to the question at hand of whether pot burial is likely to be a poor commoner or even migrant worker or some representative of elite Egyptian society.
> that already disqualifies them from being poor.
No it does not, you're extrapolating way to much by way of some modern interpretation there's quite a lot of debate around these particular questions of provenance of remains that you're hand waving and trivializing as clear cut.