I don't know that there's a liberal viewpoint on this, but it's an easy question to answer.
Yes. When it comes to poverty, all suffering is bad.
But while overcoming the barriers set up by living in poverty can be empowering if certain variables are present, such as a strong family system, a helpful mentor, success in school, or an exceptional individual vision; it must be remembered that it's the act of overcoming hardship that promotes confidence and further success, not the hardship itself. When the means aren't there to convert hardship into fuel, overcoming it is not always a realistic expectation. The hardship itself, and the suffering it causes, cannot be viewed as a good thing.
People in poverty suffer from everything everyone else does, but with fewer resources. It is much harder to take a hit when you are already down. Lower-income people are more severely impacted by things that can strike anyone, like a natural disaster or the loss of a loved one, because there is often more financial devastation that occurs in the wake of these events. For example, a middle-class person who is in a terrible car accident is more likely to have auto insurance, medical insurance, paid sick time, a comfortable environment to recuperate in after leaving the hospital, and adults with flexible schedules and transportation who can help out. If you've gone through something like this yourself or with someone close to you, you know what enormous obstacles are faced at such times for people in any economic circumstance. Insurance doesn't come close to covering all the costs. There are things like physical therapy, co-pays and deductibles, lost work time not covered by benefits, and the many incidental expenses that rear their heads in a crisis. People without insurance, without a strong family structure, without any paid sick time, living in a small or ill-equipped home, may not ever fully recover. Injuries can become permanent disabilities.
There is always the potential for someone who has experienced any type of suffering to eventually learn to use it as fodder for growth. But I see absolutely, positively, no value whatsoever in allowing poverty to exist anymore than we can help it. It is simply much less possible to find meaning in being hungry or cold, especially over many years, without hope, than it is to find meaning in suffering on an existential level.
Moments of grace can take place when light is seen at the end of a tunnel. If one keeps trudging, it is possible to one day feel oneself to be the better for having walked through it. But if the tunnel only stretches further at each turn, or grows darker from additional burdens, how often can that transcendence occur?
So, when it comes to poverty, is all suffering bad? For me, the most fundamental answer lies in the philosophy that inspired the framework for this website, Abraham Maslow's theory of the Hierarchy of Needs.
Only when people have food to nourish their bodies should they be expected to turn their suffering into food for the soul.