In a capitalist society, by definition, capitalists (which, almost inevitably, means wealthy people) own the means of production - factories, offices, and all sorts of machines and tools which people need in order to their jobs - and they employ people to actually use those means of production to make things, provide services, etc. There is thus an important sense in which, in a capitalist system, it is indeed the wealthy who create jobs. It does not, however, follow from that, that pushing more money in the direction of wealthy people, or making it easier for them to hold on to the money that they have, is a good way of encouraging them to create more jobs. It might well even have the opposite effect.
So yes, the wealthy (or a significant subset of them) do play a vital role in the creation of jobs in the sort of economy we have (which is certainly not the only possible sort of economy, and may not be the best), but the conclusions that many conservative politicians draw from this, that if we want more jobs to be created we should help the wealthy to become wealthier, simply does not follow (even staying within the capitalist framework). It might even be the case, in some circumstances, that if you raise taxes on the wealthy they might invest more of their money in enterprises that would provide employment for people, in order to gather in greater profits and remain wealthy. Otherwise, if they have plenty of money and are not likely to lose it, they might as well just sit on it, and have no real incentive to do anything likely to create jobs.
I am not actually saying that more heavily taxing the rich is the best way to get more jobs created in present circumstances, although I doubt if it would do any harm. I agree with those who are saying that the best way to increase employment, and improve the economic situation in the present circumstances, would be to channel money towards poorer people, in order to increase demand. Almost certainly the best way to achieve this is for the government to spend money on useful projects that will employ people. The point is not so much the jobs directly created by the government in this way (although those certainly will help) but the fact that this will put money in the pockets of formerly unemployed people, who will then want to spend that money, thus creating demand that the capitalist “job creators” will want to hire more people in order to meet, and those people that get hired by the capitalists will also have more money, and so create even more demand, in a virtuous cycle. (Virtuous, at least, until it goes too far and the economy overheats and crashes again. Governments, if they were rational economic actors rather than beholden to short-term political goals, could prevent this from happening by raising taxes, and building up surpluses, during good economic times.)