Hard to say since there is no such thing as trickle down. It's a left wing invention., thus it can be anything you want it to be. For example, if your definition of trickle down is that average income should rise in relation to income of the top 1% ,then there isn't much of a trickle down, is there? Neat trick!Arguing against a position nobody has.
trickle-down economics is a complete caricature of the original arguments supporting economic growth. No economist has ever argued that in order to make a poor person richer you should make a rich person richer first. Economists have, however, argued that economic growth can make us all better off, whether we are rich or poor.
So why has this trickle-down nonsense persisted for so long? Perhaps because it sets the parameters of debate around redistribution, focussing solely on inequalities in wealth, rather than inequalities in capabilities. If wealth is not trickling down naturally through voluntary processes, then it is up to the government to intervene to ensure it does.
However, there is a much better way to deal with inequalities. Instead of trying to correct inequalities through redistribution, we should ensure that everybody has a chance to participate in our growing economy. First and foremost, this means making sure people acquire the right capabilities and education.
The trickle down straw man | Kiwiblog