It is controversial that by offering at least six years of free education is most feasible way to reduce poverty in developing countries. I do stand with this point of view and I will try to give reasons to this regard.
As known by fact, poverty and low literacy rate are correlated, and mutually effected. In less developed countries particular, people in poverty would firstly try to meet their basic needs, such as food and shelter. As for education, it is far from reachable. Meanwhile, lacking the basic education, for instance, the skills to master read, write, and use numbers, could hinder people from getting rid of poverty, since they cannot get involved into the societal functions, like communication and transaction.
By scaling up, those individuals would form a large population of poverty, which makes the problem unsolvable in the personal domain. Certainly, one could increase his literacy rate and get rid of poverty by his personal will, which is also important though, however, it is hard for a group of people solely by their willingness. It is only achievable from a state fiscal perspective. Moreover, having a big population of poverty, is a reflection of governing capacity of a country government. So it is also the responsibility of the governments to providing free education.
Furthermore, offering free education to its citizens could be treated as an investment. The benefits pay back later as the entire social well-being.
Certainly, poverty is caused by many other factors, lack of education is just one of them. But, providing free education does present a feasible way to reduce poverty.