Replies

I’ve read those figures and others that counter them...my main problem with any of that is the methodology that went into gathering that data. The political and moral statistical “noise” makes synthesizing the countering data sets difficult. The problem with any statistical data...then(1890 thru 1933) as to what we see now with what Obama and what the global warmists(FOR EXAMPLE) do with data... are understanding the motives of who or which groups are gathering the data and how it is shaped to inform the body politic.

Your Cato study is a good example as to how the 18th amendment mathematically was doomed to failure. ( I think it was a planned failure personally since the amendment never got to the why’s of consumption) When I read the wording of the 18th amendment...it reminds me too much of the crap our present politicians pass or try to pass now a days...bills that must be passed first before we can see what is in them. Sociopaths try to control people thru fear and thru their vices...money talks and money was to be made via prohibition.

Some of the data cited by you I have some questions about. Drunken driving for example...automobiles were still a novel item in the late teens early 20’s...as they became more affordable and reliable thru the 20’s and thirties, the more folks bought them including drinkers....hence more citations for drunken driving! Does this mean that this was a proof that more drinkers were created by prohibition? I’m not so sure?

Drinking was said to increase per capita...or were fewer people just drinking more illegal booze...this is one area I think where contradictory data clashes. And how could the data gatherers know what was consumed?...it was illegal after all. Statistical inferences? An educated extrapolation of consumption rates based on the amounts of what law enforcement confiscated vs. guesses of what was never confiscated?

As for the rise of per capita of alcohol consumption, you also have to look at immigration trends of the 1880’s thru the early 20’s before immigration curbs took effect, and the attitudes of newly assimilating immigrant groups and their first generation progeny towards alcohol. It was not for nothing that Democrats became associated with the phrase of Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion and it was no accident that these people groups were attracted to Democrats. It was also no accident that certain immigrant groups became associated with illegal alcohol, narcotics, prostitution, illegal gambling.

I think this is why the data from that time get confused. Overall alcohol use with its associated evils dropped among the traditional people groups already well planted in America 2nd generation to 5th or more...the “Billy Sunday” crowd as one example if you will... but remained a scourge and source of tremendous crime in the newly assimilating people groups who came to this country from about 1890 thru 1924.