Sort of, but include this…
Furthermore, seeing as the government is increasing scarcity and applying risk to dealing in the market, would that not be third party influence?
I think you are right. Black markets are not really free markets - they are a byproduct of government intervention.
Which was my point that repeatedly tried to make, but apparently missing the target…
Well it’s third party influenced cause it’s the “black” market and not the “free” market cause the government has coerced whatever is in the black market to hide in the black market. Or else it would be out in the open in the free market. The government therefore skews what happens on the black market and makes the black market worse, danger wise, than if it was handling in the open to keep it honest. Modern well known example: drugs in the black market. Similar events happened during Alcohol Prohibition in the earlier half of the 1900’s.
I agree
The things is, one may see black market operators as heroic rebels…or as government accomplices. At least some of the people who sell in a black market do it with ‘unofficial’ approval from part of the government through the payment of bribes.
So at least partially, a black market is just another way for the government to ‘unofficially’ collect revenue.
This would be true if the operators actually were capitalists, but reality is they are not, they are either apathetically riding out the illicit nature of their business not caring about the external factor, or they are encouraging further government restrictions to increase the profit potential by third party involvement, they are never heroic rebels.
Organized crime is an example of government accomplices, not because of bribery, rather because their involvement in politics minimizes their risk in the market, and does nothing to lift government restriction but rather increase it…
In NY, Organized Crime backed every gun grabber going to the state legislature, why?
In NYC, the same organizations backed Giuliani, who took out the street walking prostitution, why?
Both of these cases allowed for the organizations to have a monopoly in the businesses involved, in the first case, it had the extra bonus of an unarmed civilian population, therefore more victims for racketeering and extortion, without the nagging worry about getting shot…
All prohibition (alcohol, drug and gun) also had the effect of spiking the price for these commodities by the government regulated scarcity of them…
“government regulated scarcity” ahhh, I see what you mean now. thanks. I wasn’t sure what that meant at first. I do now. I agree.
Anytime, I try to be a clear as possible, thought this is not always easy…