I hate to break it to you, but it is economics 101 that demand creates jobs. by creating a demand for commercials and their production you create jobs. Throwing money at rich people without creating demand does not create jobs at all. It just makes rich people richer. it is the major flaw in trickle down economics, and why it doesn't work at all. Like obama said, he did not make it himself, and he also did not make the media outlet that hires people to distribute the message. All of which exist because of demand for their product, and yes that does employ people. Don't get mad at me because that simple concept shows the claim no jobs were created to be false.
if no one made a demand for those things, then there would not be jobs for them to have.
here is a totally different issue. by reducing the spending which creates demand that makes the need for those jobs we would actually cut jobs even more. It is the basic concept behind cutting spending to cover the debt. by doing so you have to accept the sacrifices that come from the process. When i cut my spending to pay off my bills the small decrease in demand probably does not kill off another's job, unless it is in my business where it probably would. When the US government cut's spending it cuts a huge amount of demand. this is why neither party is willing to actually do it. It is actually an oddly downward spiral. the government cuts spending, which cuts demand for workers, which causes unemployment, which cuts tax revenue, which means they have to cut spending further.... So on and so forth. That is a little more advanced economics for you, but since 101 is confusing you that is probably a bit over your head. Cutting spending is a simple solution of fail given to simple people who cannot understand complex systems. The proper solution is a lot more complicated than simply cutting job creation spending.
However, if you want to look to spending we can cut that will actually reduce our costs i would say we could easily look at congressional salaries and benefits. We could also reduce country building and foreign religious wars. Corporate welfare is another nice place to look. We could also cut out moral wars like the ones on gays, abortion, muslims, and immigrants. We could save big money on decriminalizing marijuana.
You see, your budget is not the same as a government. Oddly enough the prosperity of the clinton era is directly attributed to credit spending. All that spending on credit lead to increased demand and increased employment. There is a little difference between your credit and the governments. You do not create the idea of money and wealth. That is established and created by the government. When you don't pay your bills the repo man comes and takes your stuff. When the government does not pay it's bills who is the repo man? He is the banker who is reliant on the government to establish his wealth. If the bankers kill off the US government they collapse the world. I find that a little hard to believe the rich people would let the collapse of the world's economies happen. It just seems to be detrimental to their existence as rich people.
