I transcribed a few bits that are especially relevant to pragmatarianism...

2:00 The government should not help to save Chrysler, of course not. This is a private enterprise system. It's often described as a profit system but that's a misleading label. It's a profit and loss system. And the loss part is even more important than the profit because it's what gets rid of badly managed, poorly operated companies. When Chrysler loses money…it's got to do something. When Amtrak loses money it goes to congress and gets a bigger appropriation.
If taxpayers could shop for themselves in the public sector then government organizations would also operate on the profit and loss system. Well...obviously they wouldn't make a profit...so it would be a revenue and loss system...but the important part is the "loss". Without all our accurate feedback...there's no way for an organization to know whether it's truly using society's limited resources for our benefit.

10:55 I don't want to make Detroit happy, that's not my aim. I want to make the citizen happy. I want to make the customer happy. The last thing in the world we want to do is to make Detroit happy.
Consumer sovereignty

23:12 Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest? You know I think you're taking a lot of things for granted. Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us. I don't even trust you to do that…let alone myself.
The Fatal Conceit

30:00 General motors cannot get a dollar out of your pocket unless you voluntarily pay it over. The government can, and that's the fundamental difference.
Dollar voting

31:50 It's the stockholders of Exxon who ultimately are buying it. If they don't like what Exxon is doing with their money, they have a perfectly good alternative…they can sell the stock. And as the stock went down, if the stockholders didn't like, it would pay somebody to change the policy which Exxon is following. We have a far greater degree of control over what Exxon does than we have over what a lot of our government corporations do.
Why wouldn't we want taxpayers to have a far greater degree of control over what government organizations do?

33:45 I think the most important single step that can be taken to stop inflation is to cut down government spending.
Eh. Milton Friedman understood that the problem was that we don't have control over what government organizations do...but then his main solution was to cut government spending. It's a non sequitur. The solution is to give taxpayers control of the purse strings...aka taxpayer sovereignty...aka tax choice...aka pragmatarianism...

As indicated by the emergence of the taxpayers' revolt and concerns for inflation, America is entering an era of economic conservatism. The citizentry is asserting that taxpayers must have a choice in the services provided, that these services should reflect their priorities, and that reasonable value is expected for tax dollars. For educators, these "new" values reflect a demand for taxpayer sovereignty, greater choice among educational programs, and more responsiveness on the part of educational systems. - Daniel J. Brown, The Case For Tax-Target Plans
Here's the partial transcript from Milton Friedman on Tolerance...

4:15 - On the one hand, I regard the basic human value that underlies my own beliefs as tolerance, based on humility. I have no right to coerce someone else because I cannot be sure that I am right and he is wrong.

7:10 - How can I be sure that I am right and he is wrong?

15:15 - If you take a scientific approach. We finally disagree and we say to one another, "look, you tell me what facts,if they were observed, you would regard as sufficient to contradict your view." And visa versa. And then you go out and see whether the evidence contradicts or supports the view you have. That's a way in which you can resolve issues without conflict.

17:57 - we must be aware of intolerance if we're really going to be effective in persuading people

18:30 - is private property such an obvious notion?

19:45 - simply saying private property is a mantra...it's not an answer

21:50 - "What is the answer to socialism in public schools? Freedom." Correct! But how do we get from here to there?

22:40 - 30 years ago I suggested the use of educational vouchers as a way of easing the transition. Is that, and I quote Hornberger again, "simply a futile attempt to make socialism work more efficiently"? I don't believe it.

22:40 - You cannot simply describe the utopia and leave to somebody else how we get from here to there

24:24 - you have to have some mechanism of going from here to there. And I believe that we lose a lot of plausibility for our ideas by not facing up directly to that responsibility

25:35 - ...despite the hopes of some anarchist-libertarians, like my son, that we can do it. I have to admit that over some 30 years now he's never been able to persuade me that we could. That just shows how intolerant I am.

Here's David Friedman's video on anarcho-capitalism...The Machinery of Freedom: Illustrated Summary

26:00 - We may very well agree on the direction we want to go in to. But just how we're going to go there, how far we're going to go there...that's a much more difficult problem.

27:00 - "Government, as such, is not only not an evil, but the most necessary and beneficial institution as without it no lasting cooperation and no civilization could be developed and preserved" - Mises