#blackmarkets

[zvaigzdelasas]

if the senate actually does go through with the tiktok bill and assuming bytedance says "no thanks" and goes for a ban instead, we'll see like an immediate meteoric rise in alternative app stores outside of US jurisdiction

[chaoticfvckingdisaster]

I need sora and ronin as morally ambiguous metal arm buddies rn

[a-dauntless-daffodil]

fanart for the fav background character ;m; i give u knuckle duster weapons on a string and actual animal leggies bc you are a sheep (alpaca?) demon person and you deserve them

[valeffelees]

only bad thing about being in a fandom where one of the characters canonically has wings is the painful lack of classic wingfic. where is my everything's the same but people have bird wings watford au where one day baz notices simon hasn't been grooming his wings bc of an injury to his ribs so he sits on his bed and makes a whole fuss about how "i'm not doing this to be nice, snow, your wings are just a travesty to look at" and then proceeds to carefully and lovingly tidy his feathers in drawn out silence while they both pretend grooming someone else's wings isn't one of the most intimate things you can do for another person. will this heartbreak never end

[dnangelic]

daisuke tries but growing up in an insane multifloor mansion worth 2489349884 billion stolen yen means he's got a tiny bit of rich kid syndrome. boy who doesn't say it but is absolutely thinking 'a $10 banana and $1000 gift for my friend isn't that expensive. i can afford it'

[jokest3r]

hello!!! i don't know if you're open to OC interactions but I was wondering if your Matvey and my Jack would be friends. ʕ⁠·⁠ᴥ⁠·⁠ʔ

Hi sorry about not answering this for a bit ive been a bit busy (btw I love Jack, he gives off a very devious aura(￣︶￣) ) but to answer your question....

Yes? Matvey comes off very removed and silent compared to Jack's loud personality. Jack would bounce off of Matvey's silent nature repeatedly which would look odd to anyone else. Jack and Matvey are like polar opposites to most people but only because Matvey likes to hide away hoping to drive anyone away from him but once Jack doesn't leave him and is there to stay... well he gets very upfront in Jack's experience with traps, explosives, everything like a quiz and very in their face that would unsettle most people(he doesn't mean to come off as unsettling and doesn't really notice it himself. Kinda like the blue eyed people meme.) Before eventually telling him about his own traps, and explosives after a few days of one-sided silence. Matvey would initially be curious about Jack's inclination towards fire but doesn't bring it up since glass houses and all that, he has his own things too. Though, Matvey would try be helpful in his own way and that burning someone alive isn't the only way to kill someone and to think more towards a silent killer like smoke inhalation. Matvey would look for guidance on his own blueprints and chemical weapons, and traps, places to improve. He takes Jack's opinions very seriously.

Matvey would work in silence while Jack pointed out areas to improve and would like to do the same with Jack if she ever let him look at their own ideas.

They are bad influences to each other in a way, Jack just wants to just kill a hostile with fire for once while Matvey just wants to be allowed to use his chemical weapons, of similar opinions. Jack's very loud and talks back while Matvey just broods in the corner or storms off, they are both brats in their own ways.

Matvey ends up filing for a release of information on Jack's behalf as he feels guilty hiding his identity from Jack who he trusts and considers as a friend. He also just thinks Matthew is the worst fake name ever given. So yes, I do think they would be the best of friends.

I was hoping on doing something more detailed but I take breaks between detailed art due to probable burnout so here's the up to no good destructive blorbos ! I hope you find them just as cute ヽ(´▽`)/

[5mind]

(( watching this weeks ultra and jotting down 'illegal monster tissue trade' into my plot bunny list

[mmishee-art]

Watch the new Silvagunner video I'm so serious it is AMAZING

[meldritchhorror]

.

[bugpysforge]

Galarian Linoone is confident but rude. He initiates conflicts recklessly, not thinking about the safety of others. He can be quite dexterous at evading blows because he easily loses his sense of balance when struck.

Race: Otterfolk Class: Ranger Subclass: Primal Shifter Conclave Location: Thrifty Mega Black Market Alignment: Chaotic Neutral

View the pokedex of all dungeon pokemon by following the link in the menu.

[zvaigzdelasas]

They didn't respond :(

[villainanders]

Okay actually the more I’m thinking about it the more sold I am on jordeclanhenry. I want Henry to be in some artistic collab with Jordan and he’s like “btw I hear your husband is still doing insane black market stuff. what’s wrong with him”

[hyrules-warrior]

Can openers must be worth more then just about anything else in this world. Like guns/knives, medical supplies, can openers in that order.

[dnangelic]

' ... '

' WHAT AM I TRYING ?! ' // @illjigoku

[renatoferreiradasilva]

The Convergence of Economic Interests and Drug Trafficking: Lessons from Prohibition and the U.S. War on Drugs

The prohibition of drugs in the United States, a policy widely contested for its social and economic consequences, finds historical parallels in the Prohibition era (1920–1933). During Prohibition, the production, distribution, and sale of alcoholic beverages were banned in the U.S. Like today’s drug prohibition, Prohibition was driven by moral and public health arguments but resulted in a parallel economy of illegal activities and an increase in organized crime. This economic history essay aims to draw parallels between Prohibition and current drug policy, highlighting how prohibition simultaneously benefits large corporations, organized crime, and ultimately shapes global geopolitics and economic structures.

1. Prohibition: A Moratorium and the Growth of the Black Market

Prohibition in the United States was enforced by the passage of the 18th Amendment and the creation of the Volstead Act. Its declared purpose was to improve public health, reduce crime, and boost societal morality by eliminating alcohol consumption. However, the economic effect of Prohibition was the opposite of what its proponents envisioned. Far from eradicating alcohol, the ban fostered the creation of a lucrative black market, managed by mafia groups that saw opportunities to enrich themselves through the illegal sale of alcohol.

Entrepreneurs of the illegal market, such as Al Capone, quickly amassed fortunes by exploiting the continuous demand for alcohol, demonstrating that the criminalization of widely demanded products tends to create highly profitable underground markets. The rise of organized crime, the bribery of politicians and law enforcement, and the violence associated with territorial control among gangs were some of the most visible consequences. The black market became an essential part of the parallel economy, moving significant amounts of money and directly influencing politics.

Similarly, the international drug trade that flourished under drug prohibition has replicated many patterns established during Prohibition. Today, drug cartels operate in ways comparable to the organized crime bosses of the 1920s, profiting immensely from prohibition while perpetuating networks of corruption, violence, and political instability.

2. The Dual Benefit: Corporations and Organized Crime

During Prohibition, large corporations were not directly involved in the illegal alcohol trade, but other sectors of the economy benefited from the ban. A notable example was the pharmaceutical industry, which retained exclusive access to alcohol for medicinal purposes. Medicinal alcohol, legalized under medical supervision, was widely sold in pharmacies and distributed by doctors who prescribed "alcohol treatments" for a range of ailments.

Thus, the pharmaceutical industry found a way to profit from Prohibition by controlling access to a still-demanded substance that was now heavily regulated. The monopoly these companies held on medicinal alcohol offered them a chance to profit through exclusivity at a time when recreational alcohol consumption was outlawed.

This model is clearly reflected in today’s drug policy. The prohibition of recreational drugs, such as cannabis or even cocaine derivatives, provides large pharmaceutical corporations with a monopoly over controlled substances that might otherwise be produced more cheaply and widely. Through patents and stringent regulatory processes, these companies dominate the market for legal treatments for pain, anxiety, and other conditions, often utilizing opioid derivatives and anxiolytics that are sometimes more dangerous and addictive than the recreational drugs targeted by legislation.

This convergence of interests—between corporations that benefit from prohibition and criminal organizations that profit from the black market—creates a complex economic structure resistant to reform, as both sides have economic incentives to maintain the status quo.

3. Drug Trafficking and the Control of the Drug Market

In the absence of government regulation and competition in a legal market, international drug trafficking emerged as the primary supplier of recreational drugs to the United States and other global markets. Prohibition creates artificial barriers that drive up the prices of these substances, generating disproportionately high profit margins for those who control supply.

In the case of cocaine trafficking, for instance, growing coca in Latin American countries such as Colombia and Peru is extremely inexpensive. However, prohibition and the risks associated with international trafficking inflate the price of cocaine in consumer markets like the U.S. and Europe. Just like the crime bosses during Prohibition, drug cartel leaders have become powerful figures, controlling territories and wielding influence over local politicians and law enforcement.

The economic model of drug trafficking is, therefore, similar to that of organized crime during Prohibition, with a lucrative parallel economy based on illegality. Violence and territorial control are essential to securing market access and ensuring the continuity of illegal operations. Moreover, just like in the 1920s, political corruption and the complicity of local authorities are key elements that facilitate the persistence of these activities.

4. Trump, Drug Prohibition, and Economic Interests

Amidst this scenario, Donald Trump’s position against the legalization of drugs is a clear example of how the prohibition economy benefits both large corporations and criminal organizations. Although Trump has adopted tough rhetoric on combating drug trafficking and illegal drugs, his resistance to legalization or decriminalization policies reflects deeper economic interests.

On the one hand, Trump’s stance protects the profits of large pharmaceutical corporations, which rely on the exclusivity of controlled substances. The legalization of drugs like cannabis could threaten these profits by opening the market to new competitors who might provide natural, more affordable alternatives. On the other hand, by keeping the black market intact, his "law and order" policy ensures that drug trafficking profits remain high, much like the profits of organized crime during Prohibition.

The economic logic behind these policies suggests a "double game" in which the interests of different groups are protected at the expense of a more effective and socially beneficial solution. Drug law reform, focusing on legalization and regulation, has the potential to drastically reduce drug-related violence, dismantle corruption networks, and open the market to new businesses that could provide safer and more affordable alternatives for consumers.

Conclusion

Prohibition and the current drug ban share many similarities in terms of their economic and social consequences. Both periods witnessed the rise of lucrative black markets, the strengthening of organized crime, and the protection of large corporate interests that control legal markets. Prohibition, in both cases, creates artificial barriers that benefit those who hold monopolies over controlled substances, whether in the pharmaceutical industry or in drug trafficking.

Donald Trump’s stance against drug legalization, far from being a mere reflection of moral or public health concerns, can be seen as a manifestation of broader economic interests. Both large corporations and international drug traffickers benefit from maintaining prohibition, creating a vicious cycle that resists reform and perpetuates a system of violence, corruption, and inequality.

The economic history of Prohibition offers valuable lessons for today’s debate on drug legalization. Just as the repeal of Prohibition reduced the power of organized crime and created a regulated market for alcohol, drug policy reform has the potential to weaken drug cartels and create a legal market that benefits society as a whole.

[foundfeast]

Pawpaw matcha latte 🌿