No one is talking about a 0.0001% anything so....
We can analyze whether prohibition helped using many different metrics. Some metrics indicated it made a difference, some indicated it didn't. Hence my comment to flap. He wanted to imply I didn't know my history yet he was the one unaware that in some ways it did work so his snark is just a mark against himself. Next time maybe he should reply with something useful instead of an empty and incorrect snark.
You are correct. There were many benefits from Prohibition, but not to society at large.
But there were many who benefitted from Prohibition. People in organized crime
clearly benefitted. Thanks to the government, the value of their illegal products
skyrocketed. This generated enormous fortunes almost overnight. The bootleggers
used their untaxed income to corrupt Prohibition agents, police, border guards,
and officials at all levels of government.
In essence, people got money not to do their jobs. It was ‘easy money.’ Others
got money to tip off gangsters about raids in advance. Again, doing so was easy
and highly profitable.
Prohibition benefitted numerous people. There were so many legal cases for
Prohibition law violations that they backlogged courts. So courts hired more
judges. Lawyers made money both to prosecute and to defend those charged
with violating Prohibition. Clerks and others made overtime pay.
People could legally buy liquor with a doctor’s prescription. So they quickly developed
numerous maladies for which whiskey was the cure. Doctors made the equivalent of
over a half billion dollars per year by writing prescriptions for medicinal liquor.
The volume of alcohol sold this way was enormous. Prohibitionists were not happy.
They proposed legislation to restrict this gaping loophole. But the American Medical
Association vigorously opposed the measure. It would be ‘interference with medical
practice’ and the doctor-patient relationship. More important, it would reduce this easy
income.
There were many beneficiaries of Prohibition. For example, Prohibition quickly led to a
700% increase in grape acreage in California. People suddenly began demanding grapes.
Not to eat. But for use in homemade wine.
Seattle police sergeant Roy Olmstead lost his job for moonlighting as a bootlegger. He
then entered the bootlegging business full-time. He quickly became one of Puget Sound’s
largest employers. On his payroll were drivers, dispatchers, warehouse workers,
mechanics and rum running crews. Therer were salespeople, collectors, secretaries,
bookkeepers, accountants, and lawyers. Olmstead chartered a fleet of boats and operated
a fleet of cars and trucks.
The production, distribution and sale of alcohol had been one-eighth of the entire U.S.
economy. Prohibition destroyed this important sector. In doing so, it wiped out many legal
jobs. For example, in 1916 there were 1,300 legal breweries. Ten years later, there were
none. But Prohibition also led to the creation of many jobs. And many fortunes. Upon Repeal,
many organized criminals invested their profits in Las Vegas. That sleepy town has boomed
ever since.
Did Prohibition work economically? Did its benefits outweigh its costs. That’s for you to decide.
https://www.alcoholproblemsandsolutions.org/did-prohibition-work/No need for a "study" when the facts are well documented.
There's no way to know if the total number of people consuming alcohol decreased as a result of the law. Just like with illegal drugs, people find a way. What is known is that without government taxation on moonshine, there is no accounting for how much alcohol was consumed.
What is known is that people wishing to partake would be more likely to over indulge in a speak easy and other places where alcohol was still served, just not openly. Gone were the bars and taverns where one could drop in for a casual beer. If one wanted to drink during prohibition, the customer likely over-compensated for being dry most of the time.
There are benefits to drinking, such as lower incidence of heart disease and stroke when alcohol is consumed in moderation. Those that chose to follow the law and abstain from drinking saw a rise in heart-related ailments.
So, some people benefitted greatly from prohibition if they were on the wrong side of the law. Given that it took a relatively short amount of time to repeal the law, it is safe to assume the cure was worse than the disease.