More on Dealing with Big Business

 

February 21, 2026

Re: That deal between Amazon and Montgomery County for the data center.

 

 

I worked up a scenario in which a town negotiates with a big corporation that is trying to gouge the town with tax breaks, etc.

 

First, the town holds a meeting to see what they want to change and what they don’t want to change about their area. (Broad strokes only, as no two people, let alone an entire town, will ever agree on details.)

 

In order to find tough negotiators, they should survey wedding planners and hospitality businesses, and ask for a list of their most demanding, entitled clients. Those clients would be the negotiators.

 

For cutthroat legal representation, they should contact the lawyers who represented the ex-spouses of the big business’s negotiating team in their divorce settlements.

 

 

(I have a scenario in my head of a town hall meeting, with the representatives of the big business looking sneeringly from the front of the room at the citizens in the audience. Once the town’s leader mentions digging up the demanding clients, the sneers vanish; and once they bring up getting the divorce lawyers of the ex-spouses as the town’s counsel, several of the representatives turn pale. I think it would make an excellent movie scene.)

 

Stop Letting Big Business Act Like It's Doing You a Favor

 

February 18, 2026

 

There’s a headline in today’s paper about a lawsuit by residents of Montgomery County, MO who want to void a deal that officials made with Amazon to put in a data center. I didn’t read much of it; I couldn’t get past the first paragraph, which mentions giving Amazon up to $1 billion in tax credits.

 

A) Amazon needs tax credits like it needs a hole in the head and

B) Businesses that decide to plunk themselves in an area should have to be handing over bucks for municipal planning, and to counteract the negative effects on environment and quality of life issues—NOT getting tax breaks. They chose the region for a reason—lots of space, cheap land, etc.; they wouldn’t settle in a place if they weren’t going to benefit from it; so instead of letting them bleed the place dry, they should be ponying up. 

 

They should pay for the environmental impact study, and have plans for, and commit funds to, mitigating the effects of increased use of resources, the inevitable higher housing costs, effects on wildlife, etc.

(This isn't just about Amazon; it goes for sports teams and other businesses that want tax breaks for doing you the favor of gobbling up your resources to enhance their profit margins.)

So, yes, officials should revisit the deal and act like Hollywood divas, not starving actors ready to work for peanuts: Say, “You want the commodities, you pay us, we don’t pay you.”

They should hire an agent: An experienced negotiator, used to dealing with big business; and a high-powered law firm to draw up the contracts and ensure that they are kept.

THEN they should consider if the deal is really good for the community.