Thanks Bharat, I see… that’s more or less what I (not fully consciously) had in mind. In which Rothbard book can I find the quote? Thanks.
Another way, I think, one can use some logic here could go like this: assume that the tax has only the incidental part, and no indirect effects. Then there would be incentive for the business owner and the politician to invent the tax – only the worker will be hurt, and owner not at all. Then the owner and the politician could split the money they took from the worker! And so.. all the way down until the worker is exploited to the edge of his very physical existence and, lo and behold – Marxism was right!! Capitalism is unstable and exploits workers! But, no, the indirect effects immediately enter and stop this vicious cycle because workers pain diffuses onto the owner.
So it seems that these “indirect effects” are essentially important, and should not be neglected to mention. When I heard Mr. Woods (and M. Friedman in a youtube clip also) saying that the worker bears 100% the burden, a red lamp went on: wait! something’s fishy here!
Anyway, thanks for clarifying this via Rothbard.