Posted on 10/13/2014 5:07:25 PM PDT by Kaslin
According to Forbes magazine, at least 5,000 Americans contacted healthcare providers fearful they had contracted Ebola after the media reported that someone with Ebola had entered the United States. All 5,000 cases turned out to be false alarms. In fact, despite all the hype about Ebola generated by the media and government officials, as of this writing there has only been one preliminarily identified case of someone contracting Ebola within the United States
Ebola is a dangerous disease, but it is very difficult to contract. Ebola spreads via direct contact with the virus. This usually occurs though contact with bodily fluids. While the Ebola virus may remain on dry surfaces for several hours, it can be destroyed by common disinfectants. So common-sense precautions should be able to prevent Ebola from spreading.
It is no coincidence that many of those countries suffering from mass Ebola outbreaks have also suffered from the plagues of dictatorship and war. The devastation wrought by years of war has made it impossible for these countries to develop modern healthcare infrastructure. For example, the 14-year civil war in Liberia left that country with almost no trained doctors. Those who could leave the war-torn country were quick to depart. Sadly, American foreign aid props up dictators and encourages militarism in these countries.
President Obama's response to the Ebola crisis has been to send 3,000 troops to West African countries to help with treatment and containment. Obama did not bother to seek congressional authorization for this overseas military deployment. Nor did he bother to tell the American people how long the mission would last, how much it would cost, or what section of the Constitution authorizes him to send US troops on "humanitarian" missions.
The people of Liberia and other countries would be better off if the US government left them alone. Leave it to private citizens to invest in African business and trade with the African people. Private investment and trade would help these countries develop thriving free-market economies capable of sustaining a modern healthcare infrastructure.
Legitimate concerns about protecting airline passengers from those with Ebola or other infectious diseases can best be addressed by returning responsibility for passenger safety to the airlines. After all, private airlines have a greater incentive than does government to protect their passengers from contagious diseases. They can do so while providing a safe means of travel for those seeking medical treatment in the United States. This would remove the incentive to lie about exposure to the virus among those seeking to come here for treatment.
Ebola patients in the US have received permission from the Food and Drug Administration to use "unapproved" drugs. This is a positive development. But why should those suffering from potentially lethal diseases have to seek special permission from federal bureaucrats to use treatments their physicians think might help? And does anyone doubt that the FDA's cumbersome approval process has slowed down the development of treatments for Ebola?
Firestone Tire and Rubber Company has successfully contained the spread of Ebola among 80,000 people living in Harbel, the Liberian town housing employees of Firestone's Liberian plant and their families. In March, after the wife of a Firestone employee developed Ebola symptoms, Firestone constructed its own treatment center and implemented a program of quarantine and treatment. Firestone has successfully kept the Ebola virus from spreading among its employees. As of this writing, there are only three Ebola patients at Firestone's treatment facility.
Firestone's success in containing Ebola shows that, far from justifying new state action, the Ebola crises demonstrates that individuals acting in the free market can do a better job of containing Ebola than can governments. The Ebola crisis is also another example of how US foreign aid harms the very people we are claiming to help. Limiting government at home and abroad is the best way to protect health and freedom.
PAUL'S A KOOK! PAUL'S OFF HIS MEDS!
Here’s my problem with what Ron Paul just said, this Ebola epidemic is a good reason to temporarily suspend freedom of international travel to save freedom in the long run. The fact that the CDC are allowing so little restrictions and petty lawlessness are exactly what will destroy freedom with anarchy, which is the worst form of tyranny.
Here is the libertarian position on immigration, would this help if Ebola breaks out South of the border, would it ever help anything, in anyway, except to end America?
COMPLETE PLATFORM TEXT
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CIVIL ORDER
IMMIGRATION:
“”THE ISSUE: We welcome all refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new “Berlin Wall” which would keep them captive. We condemn the U.S. government’s policy of barring those refugees from our country and preventing Americans from assisting their passage to help them escape tyranny or improve their economic prospects.
THE PRINCIPLE: We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality. Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested. Furthermore, immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age or sexual preference. We oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens just as we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.
SOLUTIONS: We condemn massive roundups of Hispanic Americans and others by the federal government in its hunt for individuals not possessing required government documents. We strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. Such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers, and systematically discourage employers from hiring Hispanics.
TRANSITIONAL ACTION: We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.””
“Ebola is a dangerous disease, but it is very difficult to contract. Ebola spreads via direct contact with the virus. This usually occurs though contact with bodily fluids. While the Ebola virus may remain on dry surfaces for several hours, it can be destroyed by common disinfectants. So common-sense precautions should be able to prevent Ebola from spreading.”
Yeah....just like the rhinovirus. Who gets a common cold anymore?
That comment by RuPaul has already been overtaken by events. Just ask that poor nurse.
Anyone that doesn’t know how quickly a virus can spread also doesn’t have a clue about the effects of compound interest.
Baddabing!
I wish elderly, washed up politicians would just shut up and go away!
Isn’t this fool’s 15 minutes over yet?
Yahtzee !!
Berlin Wall...
That’s as far as I cared to read.
The border is not a freedom issue. It’s a sovereignty issue.
Would 200 million refugees be too many?
How about 500 million?
How about 1 billion?
How about 3 billion?
Is there any number that would cause the open borders people to rethink? So far, I’ve seen no evidence of it.
Folks, do the ideals of the United States mean anything at all. Those of us who grew up with them, understand them, and wish to seem them enshrined forever, realize they won’t be if we are flooded with too may people who don’t know them, won’t reverence them, and will vote to overturn them in massive numbers before we can stop them.
The real question is this.
Should the Citizens of the United States have a right to their own identity, their own culture?
Our overlords on Capital Hill and at the White House, and at many state Legislatures and governors offices, don’t recognize our right to exist, and cling to truths we hold dear.
I’m sorry, but that simply isn’t workable for most citizens.
If it’s not racism for them to flood our nation and destroy our culture, then why should it be racism to try to retain our nation and culture?
The government is supposed to be answerable to us.
It isn’t. This has to stop!
We'd need three weeks of the bring out your dead wheelbarrow to cart all these mofo's away !!
They been over quite a while ago
The action that would best help sub-Saharan Africans is for them to be re-colonized. That is not likely to happen. Maybe the Chinese can step in and do something for the Africans. Other than scarf up their natural resources I don't know what, but they can have at it.
Ain't it great when "our champion of libertarian solutions" starts with a premise founded in a government lie?
If you read it carefully, he doesn't even say there should not be a common-sense travel ban. His son Rand has called for one.
But instead of saying that, Ron says this:
Legitimate concerns about protecting airline passengers from those with Ebola or other infectious diseases can best be addressed by returning responsibility for passenger safety to the airlines. After all, private airlines have a greater incentive than does government to protect their passengers from contagious diseases. They can do so while providing a safe means of travel for those seeking medical treatment in the United States. This would remove the incentive to lie about exposure to the virus among those seeking to come here for treatment.
What Ron is doing here is dodging the issue and playing to his ancap-philosopher $ubscriber ba$e. Rand is being more of a statesman serious about governing by stating the obvious -- of course there sould be a travel ban.
Better yet, travel ban from affected countries until the outbreak is contained over there. No admittance for the infected.
It doesn't connect the Trilateralists or the Bilderbergers to Ebola.
Ron Paul never does actually get around to saying how an absence of government intervention would stop Ebola from getting into this country and how it would stop from spreading once it does get here.
He spends a lot of his rambling missive assuring us that there is nothing to worry about even if you’re standing right next to someone who is infected. As a physician, he should know that pathogens will change their methods of transmission [viz. become airborne] if otherwise thwarted.
Why do not all who say that there is no concern about an Ebola outbreak invite all of those who are infected to live in their houses and show us how safe we really are?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.