As with a couple of other matters in which you have declared yourself uninterested, you might want to take enough interest to avoid repeating your more obvious and silly errors of claim and reasoning. Like the lipstick Confederate flag design on your forehead, they detract from whatever it is you are trying to say, in ways you don't seem to be aware of. When you confuse a Hardin commons with a "common good", you also mislay the role of government in dealing with the problems characteristic of each. One of the sometimes available solutions to the Tragedy of the Commons is to make the profits from the exploitation a common good, for example. Another is to vest an ownership interest in the exploited commons - any ownership interest, usually a State but others are possible. These solutions require governmental intervention in a free market, and the forced establishment of new terms for the free market exchange. Neither solution is visible to someone who thinks a Hardin commons is a "common good" (and even vice versa, with the seriously oblivious - see education, above). All solutions to a Tragedy of a Commons, in real life (and they are common, as every commercial fisherman in the world has discovered since WWII) , involve governmental interference in a private market. That is often but not always true of solutions to the problems of a common good. That's a fairly significant difference, no?