I suppose it's not surprising that you have it backwards. There isn't some conspiracy on the definition of trickle-down economics. It is primarily about lowering taxes on the wealthy so that they are incentivized to invest in new means of production and create jobs. Thus wealth trickles down from the top to the bottom in the form of demand for new workers, in theory anyway. Reagan is the one who made it famous by cutting taxes in half for the wealthy.
Government spending is the typical Keynesian line of economic thought where the government can provide stimulus to a lagging economy. Problem is that's not how it works in practice - the government spends and spends in good times and bad. It isn't exactly the opposite of trickle-down, but it's close enough, though they aren't mutually exclusive as the national debt can attest to.
Ok, so a few more things:
-Whats surprising is you glossing over the corruption of the system and ignoring the point it wasnt designed to be manipulated as such, as well as other key points / questions that you did not answer.
-We disagree with trickle down, it was clearly pointed out who has what and where it comes from. It's not complicated -take from the producing class to give to the recipient class; pretty much Keynesian [aka redistribution] economics in a nutshell. Disprove this and you might have a valid point.
-By allowing more people to have more disposable income, the entire economy benefits. I'd also point out how taxation can destroy an industry and cost lots of jobs. Do you recall the Luxury tax from the 90's? Bill Clinton quietly signed off on repealing it due to destroying over 25K jobs in the luxury boat business. The gain from that tax was a paltry $150 or so million gained at its height. So much for your point above, eh? Wealthy people arent stupid, they just wont pay for shitty ideas. Here's just a taste from a leftwing source: HOW TO SINK AN INDUSTRY AND NOT SOAK THE RICH - The Washington Post
-The National Debt will never be repaid at this point. They are doing nothing more than kicking the can down the road and passing it off to future generations because they will get theirs now and will be dead when the day of reckoning arrives. Taxation isnt the answer, cutting spending is. Given social spending is over 2/3 of the federal budget, you have an excellent starting point. Problem is that none of these cowards have the balls to make the tough decisions (especially with democrat scum telling everyone that cutting spending means they hate the poor.. while they fucking line their pockets in office). We're quite fucked.
Agreeing with me isnt weakness or losing, it's a sign of intelligence.