Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxj!houxm!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!cca!ima!inmet!nrh
From: nrh@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <1959@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 13-Feb-85 01:59:01 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.1959
Posted: Wed Feb 13 01:59:01 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Feb-85 04:01:56 EST
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:ucbcad:-9300:inmet:7800300:177600:1155
Nf-From: inmet!nrh    Feb 11 20:36:00 1985

>***** inmet:net.politics / ucbcad!faustus /  1:44 pm  Feb  8, 1985
>
>If IBM were the only menace, that wouldn't be so bad. What worries me
>is that what tends to fill the vacuum are groups like the Mafia (not to
>mention foreign governments). Of course, this is more of an argument
>against anarchies as opposed to Libertarias.
>
>	Wayne
>----------
>

My understanding is that the Mafia tends to fill the vacuum
only when government CREATES it by making something illegal.

The Mafia is no longer a large liquor supplier, and its biggest
moneymakers are drugs and prostitution, and, where it is illegal or
highly-regulated, gambling.  Remember, if something is legal, the
competition to supply it tends to be intense, and people prefer to deal
with those who won't break your legs when you complain about the quality
of the merchandise.  Conversely (and I admit I'm extrapolating here) the
Mafia presumably makes the most at illegal industries because it can
depend on government preventing large entrepreneurs from entering, and
it can use unreasonable tactics against small ones.

Not that I know anything at all about the Mafia firsthand (really!).