To break down the paradox of thrift into its most basic components, you are left with what? How much people are either willing to spend or can spend. That is after the essentials how much wealth do they have that can be re-invested back into the economy to create stronger demand? To take this argument to its logical extreme, you could quite easily argue that in order to create more and more demand you need to remove more and more essentials from the back pocket of individuals. I.e. if the government placed further empathize on basic needs like further subsides for food, transport, health and old age, then they would not be needed to cut into the wealth of individuals thereby creating more opportunities for greater investment and by extension more growth.