PHARMACIST STEVE

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-157.html

Per Capita Consumption of Alcoholic Beverages (Gallons of Pure Alcohol) 1910-1929.

The 18th Amendment went into effect in 1920 and ended in 1933

Although consumption of alcohol fell at the beginning of Prohibition, it subsequently increased. Alcohol became more dangerous to consume; crime increased and became “organized”; the court and prison systems were stretched to the breaking point; and corruption of public officials was rampant. No measurable gains were made in productivity or reduced absenteeism. Prohibition removed a significant source of tax revenue and greatly increased government spending. It led many drinkers to switch to opium, marijuana, patent medicines, cocaine, and other dangerous substances that they would have been unlikely to encounter in the absence of Prohibition. Those results are documented from a variety of sources, most of which, ironically, are the work of supporters of Prohibition–most economists and social scientists supported it. Their findings make the case against Prohibition that much stronger.

Apparently back then we were more concerned about spending money that we didn’t have and increasing the country’s debt. Unlike today, when our national debt is around 18 TRILLION and has at least doubled in the last six years and the war on drugs continues to ramp up. Consuming more resources, creating more “criminals’ and like back then… our prison system is being stretched to a breaking point.

But today we have for-profit prison corporations who are willing to build more and more prisons and happy to get paid to  “baby sit”  these non-violent criminals.. and lobby Congress for tougher/longer sentencing for drug violations. Maybe this is how we are reducing the unemployment rate.. I don’t think that prisoners are counted as unemployed and a new prison will hire more people.. Win-win for bureaucrats that like to use figures on what a great job they are doing…

Filed under: General Problems