Again I did not say that any regulation is evil. "Tragedy of the commons"
You are again making up an argument so you can have a perceived win.
Twardlow dropped the half of the equation of "regulate".
To control or regulate the means of production can be worse than own it.
You continue to say what others believe instead of stating your case, effectively fighting a Paper tiger.
You continually create a strawman to advocate and promote socialist ideals.
I truly do not believe you can even see this in yourself.

Please show me and where I said that "any and all regulations is evil"
You cannot do that.
Because I advocate free market solutions does not equate to any of your statements.

No. Because I do not advocate Socialist policy.
You, clearly advocate socialist policy.
I accept that there must be some regulation. "Tragedy of the Commons"
I advocate free market policy.
Drug Regulation for example could be done in the free market.
There would be more of a net gain to society than having the government do it.
Prices would come down. Less people would die because drugs could come to market quicker. Drug companies would make less. There would be more competition.
I don't need the government to tell me what is safe or what works. We have Doctors for that, the internet, consumer reports.......
Real simple.
Perhaps you think this is deluded to not tax people to pay for things like the FDA.
If I did not work or want to work and had no problem living off the hard work of someone else, I would have no problem with government doing everything for me at the expense of someone else..
That simply is not my morality.
I'm ok with that.

Cool,
I never knew that either.
I always like to learn.
I tend to know a little more about English Common law and Constitutional law.
I need to hit google or WIKI and learn a little more.

I think a secondary point of the video is our comparison model is flawed.
We see all the benefits of our way of thinking but fail to see the flaws in it.

The point of the video is about individual morality and ethics.
It is addressed to an individual's obligation to be t***hful to ourselves and to others.

Your assumption that his assumption was shaky is shaky.
In his example he used a salesman time. In the Mall example you use the Mall space.
He did mention using the resources of the store which would include it's space.
Typically people will go to a mall and hang out and eat.
Kids go to the mall and hang, which probably isn't a good idea anyway, not that there needs to be a law against it.
Prager never said anyone was guilty of Theft according to the law.
Obviously you cannot legislate morality although liberals and conservatives both try to do this.
His second example is of women going to a clothing store to use a dress for an event and after the event returns the dress.
I know woman who have done this.
It is immoral and unethical to do so.

I happen to think it is completely moral to call a store and ask for a price.
The owner in that case would know I am price shopping.
I guess you could say I am looking at the principle of what he says and not trying to find the flaws and exceptions.

I had a friend who owned a Technology store that went out of business because he was priced out of business based on the internet.
People would come into his store collect information about a product and not buy anything.
I actually think he should have gone out of business... based on free market principles.
That being said, I cannot defend the morality of people who pump a salesman for information fully intending not to buy a product when they walk in the door.

I also defend Mall owner rights to ban loitering.
I also would never let my children loiter.
Prager is addressing individual morality in this video.
He is addressing what is right and wrong, not the law.

When I go to wall mart and shop I always return my cart to the cart holder. I usually take a cart from the parking lot when I go in.
That is my morality. It helps Walmart keep their cost down by not having the cart guy do as much work....Adds value to Walmart so that a Cart collector could maybe stock and block some more items.

It sound like you have a complete ethical relationship with your salesman.
Congratulation.

I had never heard of the Talmud.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AEMd6NDT5Z8

Quit comparing......

You seem to draw out these fanatical scenarios and label people who "Advocate" Capitalism as being some purest.
I do not advocate "Pure unregulated Capitalism". I clearly stated that would not work.
You seem to think Capitalist ignore or negate the rule of law.
You obviously did not read my entire write up here.
You also seem to demonize and draw extreme views of anything you do not profess.
I would agree that there has to be some regulations by government. Our environment is one of them.
Libertarian type thought breaks down on "The Commons" aka Tragedy of the Commons.
When things like air and water are shared across space and land. (I can pollute your space or land and not even be on your land). Laws and regulations must be in place to protect that.
S***ery is illegal....Rule of law.
I believe it is kinder and more humane for a capitalist to give a man a job, than have a government steal from the rich so the poor do not have to work.
There is no utopia. I have said this many times.
Both Classical liberalism(I am a classical Liberal) and socialism are polar opposites where the scale is sliding.
The further you move toward Classical liberalism the better off your society is.
This is how we became the greatest nation on earth through Classical liberalism.
Capitalism is only the economic side of the political ideology of being classically liberal.
Socialism only addresses the economic side of a society.
Liberalism today is nothing what Liberalism was for the first 150 years of our country.

Governments gain power through tragedy.
War breaks out and we tax...aka...The Marshall plan.
We have a depression and we Tax or have a war to bring us out of the Depression.
Each time a tragedy has occurred in our country we as a people have lost liberty.
All societies have tragedy. People in power want to "Fix" the problem.
Most times the problem is self correcting over time.
We live in a society of instant pleasure, the instant fix, the quick solution.
The reason that people get wealthy is they can postpone pleasure.
They sacrifice today for what they may have tomorrow.
Socialist can not do this. They promote government because they want the instant fix.
They want someone to pay for someone else in the name e******y. It's the quick fix.
The socialist fails to see the long term unintended consequences of socialist policy.
The socialist only recognizes instant pleasure because it "FEELS" good.
Socialist policy often FEELS good but rarely does good.
The idea of FEELING good about oneself and their belief is fundamental to socialist thought.

Here's a video on Feeling good vs Doing good.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rOb_z-yYrU&t=119s

"God made man...Samuel Colt made man equal"

Cool bases...One looks like a coffin....Ideal for a band named the coffineers.

Come on Green. You left out all the liberals. LOL
The next time you look at UCR(FBI) take it with a grain of salt.
Their are gold in them their mountains, but the mountains is a bunch of garbage.
97 percent of people will agree with me on that...If they are on my team, otherwise....They're fired....

Not frustrated.
A bit sad to see us moving in one direction, and China moving in the other....A China who will likely eat our lunch in the long run.
Most countries are to varying degrees socialist....Even this one somewhat in the beginning.
I h**ed to see the lease run out on Hong Kong in the 1990's.
Hong Kong was truly the city that never slept. A flat 5% tax. It had the most populated square mile in the world.
I view socialism on a sliding scale. The further you slide into it, the more the people who are supposed to be helped are harmed.
You end up having more real problems than perceived problems.
The real problem you have in the end is your ability to produce goes down under a socialist state.
Again the scale is sliding. The more you move the doers and make them controllers, the less resources you have to produce.
The less wealth you create.
Really simple concept.
I am not an ideologue although I can see where some might think so.
There is no utopia.
I advocate free markets....It does not mean I do not accept non free market(government) solutions, when they are necessary.
The key word in all of this is advocate.
True Capitalism is an unkown ideal that will and can never happen.
Never the less I am a capitalist. I promote and encourage free market solutions in most cases.
What I find interesting is that I can say that I am a capitalist because of what I advocate.
Many people can not call themselves socialist even though every side they take is on the side of promoting a bigger government and regulation.
Classical liberalism is nothing what Liberalism has evolved into today.
Politically I consider myself a "Classical Liberal".
Economically I consider myself Capitalist.
To be a Classical Liberal, I would have to be a Capitalist.....
The political ideology of Classical Liberalism aligns with the Economics of Capitalism.
I truly don't get to uptight about my positons. I like to think they are pretty well thought out.
I do seem to get others very uptight.
One of the things I do like about you...Is you really don't start all the name calling and demonization...
I know we all have our moments.
Classical Liberals are some of the most tolerant people on earth. We are outnumbered typically on both sides of and argument.
We have to be tolerant...... or take meds.....

One final note about being free.
I use the term Liberty.
"There is no greater tyranny for a man to have to pay for that which he does not want simply because you think it is good for him."
Robert Heinlein.
Most people want their selected liberty. They have no problems imposing on someone else's Liberty.
The peace activist has no problems v****g the gun owners rights away.
The Health activist has no problem forcing someone else to pay for others medicines and health care. Even though that person may believe they die when they die and has no want or need for health insurance.
The Restaurant owner has no problem regulating the street vendor out of business because he takes business from him(Crony Capitalism)
The Drug companies have no problems with regulations that stifle new startups with regulations, because it protects their markets(Crony Capitalism)
Taxi cab drivers in New York have no problem with regulations that prevent other people starting up a Cab company.(It cost 1 million dollars per car for license)
Austin Texas even Banned Uber because of the "Taxi Lobby"
The list goes on with what regulation and socialism does....The unintended consequences.