They are reacting to incentives, just like Amazon is. They are stuck in a tragedy of the commons, and each is trying to play the field, as best as they can.
I'd place the blame on the agent with more power (Amazon), and the one that initiated this spectacle (Amazon).
That they are, but only to say 'I created 50k jobs; re-elect me.'
To me, that's not much as an incentive but a plea for holding power. At the end of the day the public servants have limited time to make things happen. Companies don't.
If you go buy a new car, you haggle with the dealer. That's just something you do. You have total control to walk out (you have more power,) and you wanted the new car (initiated.)
Yes the dealer will be upset that you haggled, but they still get paid commission, even at a reduced rate. You go home happy, because you got what you wanted, the dealer is happy to have gotten something over their competitor (and the money doesn't hurt); win-win.
Getting an Amazon HQ, as a cornerstone employer in their city achieves that. Or at least, that's the general economic consensus.
> If you go buy a new car, you haggle with the dealer. That's just something you do. You have total control to walk out (you have more power,) and you wanted the new car (initiated.)
If a dealer offers me a shitty deal, I can go across the street, to another car dealer. Likewise, if my offer sucks, there's no shortage of other people buying cars.
How many companies are wooing cities with 50k jobs, right now?
Of course, they do! Small businesses are less efficient, and have to employ more people to get the same amount of work done.
But optimizing for this is anathema in an ideological climate where the lowest price for the customer is the most important thing, all consequences be damned.
Also, many towns hope to, in theory, attract more employment through satellite industries, that spring up around the big company. These satellites won't be getting any tax breaks.