We did a scenario planning project where you put together human trends and factors to try and predict several versions of the future 10 years from now.
In one of our scenarios was a future where humans bounced from job to job (high turnover, low unemployment) and skills-based education was cheap and easily accessible. Some of the factors leading to this was the "established"-education bubble bursting, increased automation, and less desire for consumers to own assets while still having access to them (variable sharing economy).
A #2 type of future might not be that unrealistic.
I'm not sure what you're trying to get at but a race to the bottom among municipalities and states to try and attract businesses is already happening and has been for some time. My point is that this won't actually solve the problem posed so much as redirect it somewhere else.
#2 solution isn't about moving existing jobs, it's about lowering the barrier to entry for new jobs, since demand isn't fixed and variability will increase.
You will always have tug-of-wars between municipalities (e.g. Applebee's HQ between Missouri and Kansas) - but businesses in states or munis with a low barrier to entry for new jobs can fulfill and capitalize on variable demand faster.
In one of our scenarios was a future where humans bounced from job to job (high turnover, low unemployment) and skills-based education was cheap and easily accessible. Some of the factors leading to this was the "established"-education bubble bursting, increased automation, and less desire for consumers to own assets while still having access to them (variable sharing economy).
A #2 type of future might not be that unrealistic.