This doesn't even address the core of trickle-down theory. That being that all people get their jobs from rich people.
Further, the results are completely consistent with trickle down theory.
In highly socialized countries, the top 5 percent will gain the vast majority of national income, while the rest will receive very little. Under the pre-'78 Chi-coms, heads of the government run enterprises were given typical massive government salaries, while 66% of the population lived under the poverty level. That is completely consistent with your reports data. However, this does not change that all the jobs were due to the rich people running the companies.
Under a capitalist system in China, where supply and demand determined the wages under a competition for workers, less than 3% of the population is under the poverty level, and the balance of national income is more even than before, although it will never be even, and nor should it. But that still doesn't change that all jobs were due to rich people.
In short, the Trickle-down theory, is still and always will be, the way all economies work. The only reason is works better in one area over another, is simply due to socialism vs capitalism.
Under socialism in China, rich people were unable to use their vast incomes to produce more jobs. Under capitalism in China, they were.
The only way to disprove trickle down economics, is to show an example where trickle up worked. You need to show me someone who has a job from a homeless bum. That would be trickle up.
