I am not “Nick Skias” I have no idea who Nick Skias is. There is probably many people named Nick who consider themselves Libertarian.

But answering your questions to this other Nick:
- No I don’t think taxes should be raised. Taxes should pay for infrastructure, national defense, and to establish some bear minimum social safety nets for those who are unable to fend for themselves (i.e., orphans, the extremely retarded, demented senior citizens, etc.) I also like the idea of consumption taxes instead of an income tax, but I haven’t gotten a chance to look that into it.
- Gun ownership is a fundamental right. The State, however, does have a compelling interest to prevent convicts or people with mental disabilities from receiving weapons. I think that is just common sense, and so does the Supreme Court (See DC v. Heller).
- Marijuana should be legalized. It would decrease the cost of incarcerating non-violent offenders and would generate revenue.
- I don’t think the govt. should be telling gays they can’t marry, and gays marrying doesn’t effect me whatsoever, as long as any laws specifically rule out forcing religious organizations from performing these marriages (which would, in itself, violate the 1st amendment and has been specifically ruled out in states legalizing gay marriage).

….and no…I am not Nick Skias….

What do you think about government devalueing private property (as in 2000 friends of Oregon) to buy it for “environmental land” then siezeing it! They call it purchase, but after devalueing it, it’s been declared almost worthless! Then posting it –NO Treaspassing –public property! For Greens only!! I was taught that both the Articles Of Confederation and The Constitution prohibited government ownership of more than 2% of the land! Total ownership is Communism and partial ownership is Socialism! This concept is The Kings Forest A La England! I don’t think Teddy intended the Nat Park amendment to cover ALL of America!

I think it does give me the best. I’m only 25, and I’m from NY, and never really bought into the whole social conservative thing. To me, it just doesn’t make sense and is incapatible with true Liberty. But I mean, the vast majority of my age group is socially liberal, so I’m certainly not an aberration,

As far as govt., it should be small and efficient. It should protect, but not burden. For instance, in the market the govt. should have a role protecting consumers from abuses, but other than that their hands should be off it. Judge Richard Posner of the 7th Cit. actually made this analogy - sort of - after the crash last year: You want your animals to roam as free as they can, so that they can get fat off the land. But you don’t want them running off that cliff, or down that sink hole, so it is necessary to fence them in to an extent. Likewise, govt. should prevent monopolies from stagnating competition, they should enforce strong anti-fraud legislation, and try to prevent asymetric information, so that the consumer can know all they can about the product (think SEC filings).

We should have faith in our govt., and elect competent leaders who will put policy above poltiics. Policy should be based on emperical data compiled by the scientific method. Govt. should be objective, but it isn’t. There was a reason why Washington was against political parties. And what I can’t stand is watching Democrats or Republicans refusing to join an initiative of the other party, because their party is against it, even when they know it is a good idea. Nothing gets done because each side is simply trying to stab the other in the back in order to win majorities in Congress, and then the whole cycle repeats. Its really tiring, and its certainly the reason why our govt. is so inefficient. People imply have preconceived conclusions because of the letter after their names, and simply won’t listen to objective evidence because of it. It makes no sense, and it happens on all sides of the aisle. I’m tired of it.

came back up for air and defended his comment. I haven’t played with the trolls and mobies for quite awhile.