It is always amusing when people let their dogma blind them. Trickle down was always the phlogiston theory of economics, so that believing in it often required remarkable contortions. For example, a recent Associated Press article had to reverse cause and effect. The alternative was just too much like chemistry. Check out "Rich begin feeling the pain in down economy" from August 3rd.
Let's look at the article, or at least the first few paragraphs:
"The rich are sharing your financial pain -- and contributing to it.
It may have taken longer and it may not be as acute, but there are early hints that the economic slump is crimping the lifestyles of the wealthy.
They are investing more conservatively, spending less on luxury goods and are being more thrifty with their credit cards. Many are asking their personal shoppers and private-jet travel providers to seek the best deals rather than over-the-top extravagances.
That news may produce a shrug from many people who have lost their jobs or homes in this economy. The problem is that when the wealthy get stingy, it trickles down to the rest of us."
So, what's the story. The non-rich have been losing their jobs in our soft economy. Finally, things have gotten so bad for the non-rich that even the rich are having to cut back. In a free economy money flows upwards. It's almost by definition. Our society depends on a web of economic relationships. If some people weren't getting more money than others then we'd have everyone getting exactly the same. That's conceivable, but incredibly unlikely. Sort the graph and the money flows upwards from the non-rich to the rich. It even makes sense. You can get rich by providing some good or service that people are willing to pay for.
So what has been happening ately. The non-rich have been suffering through a bad economy, and now the upwards flow to the rich has lessened. That's simple cause and effect. Economic slowdowns are harder on those with less. If you are rich enough, you won't even notice the slowdown, but if the economy slows enough it might be time to cut back on the jet share.
Unfortunately, you can't say that if you believe in trickle down economics. Money has to be mysteriously created by the rich and to somehow percolate down to the less rich. It's like the way phlogiston had to sometimes have positive weight and sometimes have negative weight to explain combustion depending on what you were burning. If cause and effect don't support the narrative, just turn them around.
That's right. If you work for the traditional media the story is not that the rich have to worry about the economic problems of the non-rich. The story is that the non-rich have to worry that the rich aren't rich enough!