Liberty for Disease Control

"Somewhere in the world, the wrong pig met up with the wrong bat."
--Dr Erin Mears (Contagion)

Ron Paul argues that it is liberty, not government, that is capable of containing infectious diseases such as the Ebola virus. Countries plagued with infectious disease are usually marked by strong central governments and chronic war. Such countries lack the capital necessary to build strong healthcare infrastructure.

Sadly, US foreign policy has tended to prop up dictatorships and promote militarism in these countries. Moreover, President Obama's recent move to send US troops to West African countries to help contain the Ebola disease was done without Congressional approval for this overseas military deployment. Once again, no specifics were provide as to the duration, cost, or even Constitutional basis of this mission.

The people of Liberia and other afflicted nations would be better off if the US government let these countries alone. This does not mean that people around the world should ignore this problem. Instead, it means that private capital and other assistance in the form of industry and charity should be free to voluntarily mobilize to address the problem.

Private investment and trade would help develop strong healthcare infrastructure. Airlines would be free to protect passengers from disease (lest the carriers lose business) while providing safe means of transport for people seeking treatment in the US (which removes incentive for refugees to lie about exposure to the disease). Experimental medicines should not be hindered by regulatory barriers such as those erected by the FDA's cumbersome approval process.

Limiting goverment is the best way to protect and improve health both here and abroad.