Stance on international humanitarian aid?

[tj1234]

Ron Paul has always been very clear regarding U.S. military involvement internationally, but I am a bit fuzzy on his stance when it comes to international humanitarian aid ... Does he see a place for the federal gov't in providing food, medicine, etc. to areas hit by natural disasters or does he consider that beyond the federal gov't mandate?

[RM918]

I'd reckon he'd rather leave it to legitimate charities and get rid of the income tax so YOU can choose whether or not to donate to them and where your money should go.

[asurfaholic]

Ron Paul has always been very clear regarding U.S. military involvement internationally, but I am a bit fuzzy on his stance when it comes to international humanitarian aid ... Does he see a place for the federal gov't in providing food, medicine, etc. to areas hit by natural disasters or does he consider that beyond the federal gov't mandate?

Welcome to the forums

The answer to your question is quite simple. Ron Paul doesn't think that a government has the right to put a gun to you and force you to pay for someone else. He believes that people should give according to their own conviction. Many many people poured out their hearts and piggy banks in recent worldwide disasters, so it is not like people will be left to rot in their messes.

Foreign aid in general is basically taking money from many poor people in one country and giving it to a couple rich people in another. It is morally wrong.

[tj1234]

Thank you for the welcome and for the responses.

[MarcNY]

I believe that is one of the very few matters we should be involved in is Humanitarian aid! This business of nation building every time another nation state feels like revolting is absolute non-sense!