Over the last few days there's been a new, bizarre ad running on the airwaves. You can watch it here on Youtube, and let me tell you, it will make your head spin.
My anger was peaked at the beginning - with the line "Are the streets of Hollywood paved with gold? No! They're paved with your tax dollars!" Read that again. While clearly they're attempting to invoke outrage by placing "Hollywood" and "your tax dollars" in proximity, anyone with half a brain should be doing a bit of a facepalm...
Hollywood is a place, and of course it's roads are paved with our tax dollars. As are the roads anywhere in the country (and technically, the commercial then cites a construction project on the Sunset Strip - which is in West Hollywood, not Hollywood). One of the government's primary jobs is to provide infrastructure for it citizenry. The commercial, paid for by "Americans for Prosperity" is apparently against... infrastructure? It gets stranger.
They then point out stimulus spending across the nation (from which their "Hollywood" example is only a minor part of) under the pejorative "pork" intending to anger you right off the bat. What they don't mention is that many of these projects were going to be done in the long term anyway, but their schedule was moved up in an attempt to stimulate the economy.
In other words, this was money we were already going to spend.
But hey, then they point out that this was happening "While America Lost 2.7 Million Jobs." So, they're saying that the construction jobs created by the spending didn't stem the tide of that job loss? That makes little sense.
They then say that this will cost every American family $10,000. I can't seem to find a source on that, and I'd honestly like to see where the hell that number came from. The only thing I can find is an article from the right wing think tank Heritage Foundation, which talks about balancing the budget, and they don't seem to have a source on it either.
I guess the message they're trying to send is that "Government spending on infrastructure is bad, even if it creates jobs which then allows those now employed construction workers to go spend money, fueling the economy - and better infrastructure so consumers can more easily access goods also stimulating the economy."
But you shouldn't be surprised. Americans for Prosperity was founded by David Koch of all people. You've probably never heard of him, but David Koch is one of the richest men in America and one of the people in charge of petroleum and chemical giant Koch Industries. Americans for Prosperity's causes have included claiming global warming doesn't exist (shocking, I know, especially from a group that gets funding from Koch Industries), and fighting against health care reform. This is merely their latest cause generated from wealthy self-interest.
I'll say it right now, i know some employers such as C.S. McCrossan in the Twin Cities, are finding a way around the cost of new workers by hiring the new ones, and then letting others who have been working the job for a while go. But then again if the government would police this, everything will be taken care of. Because i'm all for a stimulous that creates more jobs especially in fields i work in. I know parts of the stimulous require a certain percentage of workers on the payroll for a job to have not originally been in construction. But then again the main goal is to get more people out there working. So even though i favor those in the field getting the job first, the whole point is everyone's gotta work. If the government would police this, and ensure that construction crews are really creating jobs rather than just replacing people on a crew to say, hey we got a new hire as asked, then this stimulous should really work out.
The people who firmly believe this stuff aren't the target -- they already have those people in their hands. It's the undecideds who they're attempting to convince... those are the ones I hope I reach.
Although considering how liberal most of my readership is, I doubt it will make a difference.