Agree to an extent but often not in an equitable way.
Obviously this is an extreme example but I remember when Yahoo put a location somewhere in NY it eventually came out that, via the subsidies, for every $45,000 a year job that they created they received $2 million. Traditionally speaking anything > than $100,000 gap between pay and subsidy was considered to be high at the time. I fully agree that bringing businesses to an area to create jobs is a great thing, in theory, but if the taxpayers are also paying the subsidies and the benefits to the corporations are even fractionally that lopsided then even the ones with the shiny new jobs aren't really going to break even, much less the ones who didn't get a job.