What do you mean Anti-Corporation?
There are numerous "incentives" to corporations to employ people, or to have offices close to mass transportation hubs, but why? Why should a corporation, that through the magic of laws has no legal ties to an individual, receive better incentives that the individual tax payer? I live about a mile from a train station, I don't get a tax break of any kind for living close to the train station. Suppose that since I live so close, I take mass transit every day to work, reducing one more car from the highway system, polluting a little bit less, and I have the sounds of a train passing by my house every 15-20 minutes. I don't add to the cost of "wear and tear" on the roads/bridges so where is my tax break? If you want to encourage people to take public/mass transportation, then you need to encourage them to live near transportation hubs, just as you encourage corporations to open offices near such hubs. This also gives people an incentive/reason to support new/additional/expanded public transportation systems. In this part of NJ, the "MOM line" (Monmouth, Ocean Middlesex NJ Transit rail line) has been a pipe dream of the majority for over 30 years. A small minority protests it because "of the environment" or "the impact on my quality of life from a train passing by". But I assure you, give these people a few dollar tax break for letting a train pass by their house and the complaints of this minority will not only go away, but the silent majority who realizes that they could not only get their train service, but save some money, will DEMAND the line they've wanted for 30 years, be built, yesterday. Instead, our current policies are for politicians to tie up the efforts in courts, where the tax-payer pays for the "prosecution" side, which represents the minority of the people at the expense of the majority, and then we also pay for the "defense" side, which represents the public transportation corporation, indirectly by being hit with higher costs per ride. There is clearly a middle-ground where the lawyers and politicians are eliminated from the process, the tax payers save money, and services are increased.

As a second example, many corporations get tax breaks just for building an office in some state/city. But you as a worker don't get a tax break just for buying a house in some state/city even though you as the worker will:
1) pay income tax in the state/city
2) pay property tax in the state/city
3) pay sales taxes on goods you buy (mostly in the local state/city)
Again, my dad takes mass transit to work everyday, drives a few miles to the bus station, meaning his car is running, using the highways, then he takes up a spot in a parking lot, which means some trees needed to be knocked down and wildlife displaced, meaning that tax money was spent to acquire the land and do an "environmental impact study", all to make a parking lot, then he sits on a bus for an hour, crosses some bridges/tunnels, then he rides the subway, and another bus, and a short walk later, he's at work, BUT wouldn't it be ideal if there was a tax incentive for my dad to move, lets say even 2 miles from his office? At 2 miles, even maybe at 10 miles, he would be using a lot less resources, less pollution, less wear and tear on the roads/infrastructure, BUT there is no incentive for him to move close to work because:
1) Harlem NY (Columbia University) is generally a crappy area to live
and
2) it's too expensive of an area in the "good parts" (ie, where Bill Clinton has his office)
BUT, if my dad had some significant tax credit for living so close, MAYBE, just maybe, it would be worth his while. I personally work 4.1 miles from home. I don't use many resources to go to work every day, where is my tax incentive for not using so much of the highway system? Not to mention, that since I live and work so close to one another, most all of my spending is local so I really contribute a lot to the local economy (eating lunch locally every day, only buying gas locally, shopping for food/goods locally). If I worked in the city, I would probably join a gym in the city taking away local business in my area, I might buy lunch every day in the city, I might do some clothes/goods shopping out of my area. So again, where is my incentive, the one that corporations get?

So anti-corporation, you bet, because a "representative" is supposed to represent "the people". Corporations aren't "people", I don't intend to represent "legal entities", I intend to represent people. If corporations or "neo-cons" want to complain, so be it.... they can complain to people, and hopefully people will recognize that these legal entities are not people, and deserve no special treatment or incentives over people.