Rather, it states that if by leaving people alone to create more wealth, the rich get richer, the poor will too.

An increase in wealth within a group resulting from investment and wealth creation activity is always a welcome benefit of such activity – but a rising disparity in the levels of wealth held by one group comparative to another is not evidence that wealth is trickling down.

This proves that rising incomes for the rich do not increase incomes for the poor in what manner?

Around footnote 28 of the report, there is a reference to weekly earnings in the 90th percentile growing from 1.7 times the median in 1977 to 2.2 in 2001; while at the 99th percentile earnings grew from 2.9 times to 4.8; while for the top 0.5% it grew from 3.4 times to nearly 6.

That doesn’t look like a successful argument for ‘trickle down theory’ to me.

Have you actually bothered to read the report?

Chapter 2 shows that incomes for the tenth percentile (hey, that’s the way they’ve measured it) have risen by 50% over the decades. That is an increase in income to the poor….

If wealth did *not* trickle down then that increase would be negative, wouldn’t it, a decrease?