[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only markets in which criminal mobs and gangs spring up are precisely those markets that are monopolized, i.e. made black, by the central mob, the state. Violence is not +EV when free competition is allowed. It is only when government outlaws free competition that the competition becomes populated with outlaws.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think I understand this argument. Are you saying that anytime someone, for example, steals goods and then sells them, this is a result of the existence of the state?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I'm saying the criminal enterprises can only dominate in markets where legitimate businesses are not allowed to compete. Making something illegal does not eliminate the demand for it. Since the demand exists, people will supply it. Those people, by definition, are criminals. The state sends armed thugs to attack those suppliers. Is it any wonder that the most successful of those suppliers are themselves violent? Is it any wonder that those suppliers are high time preference people who are more interested in high short term profits (created by the state, of course) than they are in potential long term risks and consequences?

When the state removes the prohibition, these people simply cannot compete with legitimate businesses. Violence is risky and costly, and costs reduce profits. High time preference thugs do not form plans as well as low time preference businessmen. Their costs are higher and their planning is poorer. They suffer losses and go out of business.