Alpine Summit

Monday, May 08, 2006

Castles in the Sky

In the investing world, there is a term called "castles in the sky." It is basically the concept that a given investment has no intrinsic worth and can reach any value regardless of the company. So the stock of a company can easily have a higher stock price, and be worth more on the market, than it actually is. This means that since there is no "baseline" value to draw from, a stock that has been going up continuously for months is just as likely to continue going up in value. Historically speaking, this is pretty rare, and gives rise to the concept that there is an intrinsic value with investments--typically around the physical value of the company.

I was reminded of this concept while reading Coco's complaints about the AIDS problem on my "AIDS Amazing" post. He (assuming it's a 'he') mentioned how it is criminal and morally reprehensible that the Catholic church does not condone the use of condoms. At the same time, of course, he offers no moral absolutes to back up his own claims of how condoms are a human right. He gives us no "baseline" from which to draw. I see this over and over again among liberals who like to think they have the moral high ground when they can't even define where that ground is. In other words, they are building a castle in the sky and making assumptions on morality with no solid foundation from which to be making the claims that they are.

Allow the Vatican to dictate the moral policy of millions of people is a crime, while they claim the condom "is a sin".
If we affirm the radical islam is medieval for how they treat women, what the Vatican is?...
More about what I think in:

As I mentioned on Coco's blog, it's always those “eeevil kkkapitalists” that are the ones that kill these people according to liberals. Please. This is about personal responsibility. AIDS is a disease people don’t get (usually) unless they are behaving in an immoral manner. We can sponsor AIDS awareness campaigns all we want, but it is ultimately the choice of the people whether or not to engage in this risky behavior. With regard to the those evil corporations, if it wasn’t for them wanting to make a profit, the drugs you have so much love for, the ones that should be freely distributed, would not exist. These drugs exist as a result of someone wanting to make money. Without that “greed” (for lack of a better word), we would be living a much different, and much more miserable, lifestyle.

The vatican outlines what it thinks is moral behavior, and the people who adhere to Catholic belief CHOOSE to accept those dictates from the church as part of their faith the same way you have a moral stance that says we should condemn them for their moral stances. By the way, I’m not sure I see how denouncing condoms is “anti-woman” the same way prohibition of educating, allowing to drive, or enforcing a clothing standard on women is, but whatever.

It’s important to note, also, that the Catholic church’s stance on condoms is based on conceiving children–not preventing the spread of disease. The way I see their position, from a wider angle, is that if you are obeying the tenets of Christianity a condom is unnecessary in any circumstance–which certainly makes sense.