Justanothernameonthepage - Kansas does not "prove" trickle down doesn't work. Like always in economics there are two sides to the argument: www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/commentary/article/Don-t-blame-Kansas-woes-on-trickle-down-11234144.php
The debate we are having here (and in parliament) is what services do we want as a nation, and how should they be funded. I don't believe any party is pro poverty, hunger etc whatever some here would have you believe.
The Tories don't tax enough, put through tax cuts for the rich and have held back spending too much, trying to reduce an almighty deficit left by Labour and the economic collapse which occurred on their watch.
The Corbyn plan will likely fail too - targeting the most mobile capital in the economy (the rich and corporates) will just see an increase in offshoring from both and not raise the money expected. Plus I wouldn't trust him and McDonnell to oversee a massive investment in spending when they've never had responsibility for a budget of any real size in their lives. They're not qualified to lead it.
The others are electoral non-entities unfortunately.
For my taste, there would be modestly increased spending vs the Tory position, funded by increased income tax across the board. We do need to address the deficit in spite of what MMT would have you believe. I would leave corporation tax where it is. I would try to work out how to extract tax from the tech giants and their ilk without trashing the regime for smaller businesses (not easy at all - why all countries wrestle with it). And I would look very hard how to stop housing benefit being a government subsidy to landlords without exacerbating the homeless problem.
In my view no party has this right. Equally, do we have it right? How many of us can say there is no more we can do to help those around us? Why should we just put there for the government to do - why can't / won't the citizenry do more?