Fed cigarette and alcohol taxes, excise taxes on airline tickets, utilities etc...increases in taxes on manufacturers passed on via price increases, et al. Tax burdens, each and every one.

And it's always said by the same people who claim to support the free market. And, while I'm not an economist, I'm pretty sure the basic theory says that price is determined not by what sellers wish to charge, but by what the market will bear.

Commodities with inelastic demand -- yes, I'm talking about oil -- are of course different. But in general the market sets the price without regard to production costs.

And another thing. You're not making the argument here, but it's the standard: "If corporate taxes are raised, the only options are to decrease dividends, increase prices, or move production offshore where it's cheaper." These are presented as three equally unthinkable options. Since, as I've already said, raising prices really isn't an option, that leaves reduced dividend and offshoring.

So the dividend is reduced. Okay. And that's unthinkable because ... ?

Then there's the false dichotomy. Offshoring isn't the only option for reducing production cost. The people opposing corporate tax increases keep saying you can squeeze more money out of government through efficiency. Why don't they suggest you can work the same magic on corporate costs?

Finally, the option never put on the table is to reduce executive compensation. At some companies, some years, this can represent several percentage points of their profit. And even if the effect is only symbolic, that doesn't bother Republicans when they scream about earmarks in the latest spending plan ... earmarks that represent less than 2 percent of the total. Some of which were put in by the very Republicans complaining about them. http://www.salon.com...9/03/12/earmarks/

So:
  1. Corporate tax increases are not passed on through increased product costs.

  2. Reduced dividends are not unthinkable.

  3. Republicans should pursue increased corporate efficiency as ardently as they (claim to) support government efficiency, before citing the specter of offshoring.

  4. Republicans should demand curbs on executive compensation as loudly as the demand controls on earmarks.

  5. The blatant hypocrisy of opposing the concept of earmarks while adding some of your own calls into doubt the seriousness of the public opposition.