> There is no guarantee that, if it accomplishes “something”, the change it induces will not have negative value. So now you're arguing that constituents urgin

> There is no guarantee that, if it accomplishes “something”, the change it induces will not have negative value. So now you're arguing that constituents urging their politicians to do something is more likely to make them do the opposite? > Does alcohol produce real social harms? Yes. > Was Prohibition doing something instead of nothing? Yes. > Was Prohibition a net win? IMO, probably yes. (The negatives came from anti-Prohibition.)