1 vote

Policy Discussion?

I posted a question yesterday morning asking about a particular facet of Dr. Paul's policies. However, I've received no responses. Is there a site (either part of dailypaul.com or separate) where supporters of Ron Paul can answer questions about his policies? Thanks!

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options


Thanks for the links -- as

Thanks for the links -- as with the other materials I've read, they don't really answer my questions. I would like to know how, if I breathe toxic air, I am supposed to determine its source and levy a lawsuit..... the sources I've seen remind me of a Michael Moore documentary; they give numerous reasons why the EPA is bad, but propose no better alternative. I agree that there are definite problems with the EPA, but I believe if companies are given carte blanche to pollute however they want (with only the potential risk of a poorly-funded lawsuit), then many more environmental catastrophes will happen. For instance, Big Tobacco can be sued (and have been), yet they continue to produce. Maybe I'm missing the point, but I do not see how abolishing the EPA will actually curb pollution. Are we at least on the same page in that believing pollution needs to be limited?

I understand your point.

Yes of course pollution needs to be limited. But sadly, all the EPA does is give license to pollute to the big corporations, and it also makes it impossible for a civilian to personally sue, but allows the "govt" to sue/fine. Once the govt fines a corporation for polluting, the company can live another day to pollute again. If the EPA did not exsist, I am sure there would be a privatly funded organization much like the UL (which tests millions of electrial products and tells the consumer what is safe/reliable/good buy) that will preform much of the functions that the EPA currently does at no expence to the tax payer. How it would most likely work is the the organization would go around assessing the air/water/land and give reports much like the UL. If the reports are bad, the company would A) go out of business because an informed public would stop doing business with them, or B) they would clean up their act. And if the Organization who preformed the tasks lied/ took a bribe for a particular comapany, then their whole credibility would be tarnished and they'd never be trusted again and A) Sued or B) Simply went out of business all together. Also, whith out the EPA, if someone were to pollute your air/land/water you would be able to sue who ever polluted it, being a company or individual, and much like car accidents/male practice suits, they can be pretty large and many lawyers(who will do/hire someone to do the investigation into said polluting) will represent you for nothing if you lose, and take about 1/3 of your settlement/what ever the court rules. This could A) put polluters out of business all together just from the cost of the lawsuit (which may very well have 1-10k+ people involved with the suit)or B) Put them out of buisness over bad publicity and an angerd consumer base, C) Make their investors/stock holders sell from the bad publicity due to speculation of said pollution/disgust over said pollution or D) severly lower their profit margins which would create a sell off of their stock. All of this would ensure that corporations would practice safe/healthy work practices for unless they wanted to go out of business. Also, before the EPA there was pollution because big corporations were in bed with govt anyway and were "given a pass" by officials untill they made the EPA wich of course has not helped anyone but big business contiue to pollute.


I'm guessing you got no

I'm guessing you got no responses because that topic has been discussed here many many times. You probably should have used the 'search' feature on this site to check if the topic has been raised before.

I just put in "EPA Ron Paul" and got a ton of threads for that topic. Check some of those out.

Here's an example thread for you:

Campaign site

has a section "on the issues" - might conside one of his books.