No, lower profit per unit is coming from the increased tax burden.   Price remains the same, expenses have increased.

Let's do this again.
A) companies will attempt to avoid declining profits
B) companies will not alienate it's customer base
C) companies could attempt to increase sales in order to avoid declining profits due to tax burden

The print in my posts appear to be English to me.    Are you seeing Arabic or something? 

Despite being a senior exec at a large multinational company, you have no chance at hiring me.   I'm pretty happy working for myself.   Despite, apparently, having zero business acumen, I've managed to stay in business thru two recessions and feel pretty confident in making it thru another.

And of course we dont need to carry on a theoretical discussion on the impact of government burdens on the economy.

We know it hurts business. 200 years of data.

How about we compare North Korea and South Korea.

And North Korea didnt receive Soviet and Chinese aid?

oh yes, corporations have no problem accepting bailouts, but when gubment wants to put laws and regulations on business thats when they say that big gubment is bad.  Funny how that is.

Let's not pretend that every corp has been bailed out.   It's really very limited.

"Limited" is a rather misleading adjective.  Maybe limited in terms of the # of corporations receiving bailout money vs. the # of corporations that exist.  Not limited in any other way, though.

abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story

The bailout will cost more than the total combined costs in today's dollars of the Marshall Plan, the Louisiana Purchase, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the entire historical budget of NASA, including the moon landing, according to data compiled by Bianco Research.

I wasn't attempting to be misleading.    I'm pretty sure everyone knows that lending organizations and automakers were the big recipients.   I believe most of us would have been fine to let the auto industry "fix" itself.   The collapse of the banking industry is another story.

Nonetheless, this statement doesn't work "oh yes, corporations have no problem accepting bailouts, but when gubment wants to put laws and regulations on business thats when they say that big gubment is bad" because it implies that many businesses received bailouts when it was a limited few. 

According to this site, http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list, the number is 926.

My point is this Mike, why is it that big business and the entire right political spectrum from politicians down to right leaning peasants believe that gubment should allow the free enterprise run as it wants, and yet when this happened and so many companies were going belly up or about to they screamed for assistance.  They like the rest of us cant and shouldnt have their cake and eat it too.

And I am saying this because I am a lefty, and believe that we should have a strong government if and when they make decisions that make sense for we the people.