Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp; SamAdams76
I have been told repeatedly by a wide variety of sources that this claim is not true. Alcohol consumption did in fact go down during prohibition.

Well, it did in the first year:

Per capita consumption of alcoholic beverages in America in gallons of pure alcohol. Source: University at Albany

And then there were the unintended consequences. First was the growth of organized crime. economist Annelise Anderson wrote:

“Prohibition was a major impetus for the growth of mafia organisations. Prohibition created the potential for a major illegal market in alcohol, and it is to the years of prohibition that America can trace the growth in scope and power of its mafias.”

Unintended consequences during the Prohibition Era. Source: Visual.ly.

Another possible unintended consequence of Prohibition was the rise of incarceration rates in America. As noted by economist Mark Thornton in “Alcohol Prohibition Was a Failure":

“Before Prohibition, there had been 4,000 federal convicts, fewer than 3,000 of whom were housed in federal prisons. By 1932 the number of federal convicts had increased 561 percent, to 26,589, and the federal prison population had increased 366 percent. The number of people convicted of Prohibition violations increased 1,000 percent between 1925 and 1930, and fully half of all prisoners received in 1930 had been convicted of such violations. Two-thirds of all prisoners received in 1930 had been convicted of alcohol and drug offenses, and that figure rises to 75 percent of violators if other commercial prohibitions are included.”

37 posted on 08/26/2016 10:01:25 AM PDT by COBOL2Java (Trump is to the political class what Uber is to taxicab companies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: COBOL2Java
Well, it did in the first year:

An obvious question: From whence do you get accurate numbers regarding consumption in an illegal industry?

I've noticed that once an issue has agenda advocates, they tend to cherry pick available data (and even make it up) to support the conclusion they want.

People who don't have an agenda generally don't look at reported data with a critical eye, but merely accept what they are told because they assume whoever is telling them also does not have an agenda.

That is often not the case. We see it again and again with the "Gay" issue, with Abortion, and with Global Warming, and yes, with Drugs and Prohibition.

46 posted on 08/26/2016 10:54:40 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson