In any modern society, the working class constitutes most of the population. This is not a bad thing, but the natural consequence of economics.
Consider that these technologies will be prohibitively expensive, especially in their early stages.
Hence, barring a complete saturation of the market like we saw with computers, most people will not be able to afford brain upgrades or designer babies - and this is not likely to change, considering the current state of the healthcare and insurance industries.
Even assuming that these technologies work as intended, without any horrific drawbacks, the above would not change in the slightest. True, IQ is correlated to higher income, but this does not mean greater prosperity in the economic sense for two reasons:
1. If the working class does not benefit from these advances in technology, then we wouldn't be working with our current system, but one where the middle and upper classes push even further away from the current average.
2. Even if the working class benefits, then we're talking about raising a baseline. Income may be higher, but the change on effective income, i.e. purchasing power, would be negligible at best, harmful to those without upgrades at worst.
Local policy and the job market would require major changes if an increase in the standard of living across the board is desired, and the mentality of the non-working poor would need to be completely overhauled to encourage workforce participation. The technologies surrounding this process will likely not have any significant effect on the human psyche, or be enough to provide sufficient incentives on their own.
I don't advocate gommunism, but I sincerely hope that these technologies don't push us into the disparities seen in the 1870s-1920s. The middle and working classes need to have some influence against the elite, otherwise we will have solved none of the problems we see today.