You Can be Great If You Really Want To

Herding the Fat Cats: A Holistic Approach to Stifling Corporate Greed—And Solving Our Tax Code and Healthcare Problems in the Process!

After a year of bailouts and a barely-breathing economy, many Americans want to know what 2010 will bring. Has corporate America really learned its lesson? Author Blaine Loomer isn’t waiting around to find out. He offers up a holistic solution to ending corruption in America’s big businesses that will also create some much-needed progress in other areas.

  Cincinnati, OH (December 2009)—When President Obama criticized the “fat cat” bankers early last week, he was echoing the sentiments citizens on both sides of the political fence feel toward Corporate America. No wonder. As we look back over the past 12 months, it’s hard not to be disgusted by The Year of the Bailout. The spectacle of be-suited executives begging for government handouts is truly sickening to the Average Joes and Janes who struggle to pay their bills with their own meager, recession-choked finances. What’s worse is that most of us suspect no lessons were learned—Corporate America’s lousy decision-making isn’t likely to end any time soon.

That’s why Blaine Loomer calls BS on the whole system.

“Just consider the worst of the worst of Corporate America for 2009: AIG,” says Loomer, author of the new book Corporate Bullsh*t: A Survival Guide (Mitchell Publishers Inc., 2009, ISBN: 978-0-9842016-0-0, $29.50). “Its executives spent almost half a million dollars on a fancy retreat after receiving $85 billion in bailout money. That’s so outrageous it’s almost comical.

“The government bailed AIG out to try and protect the economy, but it didn’t address the problems that put AIG in that position in the first place,” he adds. “Too often, the government or some other entity swoops in to clean up the messes corporate fat cats in various industries have made, but nothing is done to prevent these disasters from happening in the first place.”

Despite 2009’s rock-bottom low points, reforming Corporate America is possible, says Loomer. He suggests that our nation take a holistic approach to dealing with the corruption, greed, and poor decision-making that plague many of our companies and industries.

As his book title suggests, Loomer is accustomed to advising people on how to navigate corporate bullsh*t on a personal level. (The book offers solutions to problems ranging from lack of corporate accountability to toxic colleagues to securing promotions and raises.) However, he is also plenty comfortable taking a macroscopic view of the BS.

Below, he offers up a four-part example of how a holistic problem-solving approach can help keep Corporate America in check while also addressing some of the nation’s other pertinent issues—namely, our overly complicated tax system and healthcare reform. 

The Problem Part One: Publicly trading corporations are allowed to run amok.

The Solution: “The SEC needs to have more enforcement capability,” says Loomer. “The real problem here is not the current legislation, although it does need to be updated. The real problem is that the proper resources aren’t in place to enforce the existing laws.” 

In his book, Loomer proposes that the U.S. staff up the SEC with auditors to be embedded in all public companies. These auditors will attend board meetings and audit company activities as well as investment instruments to make sure these companies are being good corporate citizens. SEC agents will be there to protect the interests of the shareholders, other investors, and employees in an effort to “prevent” greed-driven executives from shooting their own companies in the foot.

 “I would also like to see an SEC review board that would analyze new investment instruments for the risk of catastrophic losses,” says Loomer. “Investing is a zero sum game, and if someone is making 500 percent returns, someone else is taking 500 percent losses.” 

The Problem Part Two: New SEC staff will require money that isn’t available.

The Solution: “You’re probably thinking, This guy’s crazy. Staffing up the SEC for this task will require thousands of people,” says Loomer. “And you’d be right. But remember, we are approaching all of this with a holistic view. That said, let’s talk for a minute about a flat tax—an option that frequently comes up for debate.” 

One concern opponents of a flat tax often bring up is that it will cause a loss of jobs in the IRS and in accounting firms. The last thing anyone wants to do these days is eliminate jobs, but Loomer points out that we have an opportunity here to not only staff up the SEC to enforce greater corporate accountability but to also minimize the cost of managing the tax system. 

“Basically, the funds saved through the simplified tax system would be moved over to the SEC where they could be better utilized,” he explains. “The IRS employees, who already have the skill set to monitor financial instruments, should be able to make the transition to the SEC with minimal training.” 

The Problem Part Three: Independent accounting firms will suffer.

The Solution: To talk about what fate would befall the accounting firms in Loomer’s plan, let’s bring in a seemingly unrelated topic: health care reform and the possibility of a public option. Everyone is worried about government health care costs spinning out of control, right? By taking a holistic approach to these problems, the tax accountants displaced by a simplified tax system could go to work in the health care arena. 

“After all, who better to monitor the health care system than a group of auditors and accountants?” asks Loomer. “These accounting firms could work on a contract basis to monitor some or all of the health care system.” 

The Problem Part Four: Health insurance employees will lose their jobs.

The Solution: Just put these people to work administering the new health care system. 

“My answer is: Why does the government want to take on another huge cost center to administer health care when skilled people are already in place?” asks Loomer. “We could contract with the insurance companies for the administrative services that will be necessary when health care is reformed.” 

The best part of Loomer’s vision? It could conceivably allow America to solve several of the nation’s most tricky challenges without incurring extra costs or raising taxes.

“This is certainly a bold plan, and I realize that putting it into action will take more than a simple snap of the fingers,” admits Loomer. “But it seems that this kind of holistic approach is much better than trying to solve these problems one at a time, as if they weren’t all interconnected. Remember, we are all paying for the system we have now—the one that has allowed corporate greed and government ineptness to drive our economy into a recession—and we will be paying for the system we have in the future. We might as well make it a better one.”

# # #

About the Author: 

Blaine Loomer’s expertise in the corporate world evolves from over 20 years of experience in corporate management and sales. He has consulted with thousands of companies over the years, from enterprising individuals of mom and pop shops to executive officers of some of the largest corporations in America. As a corporate sales expert, he has hired, educated, and managed sales teams across North America. Over the years Blaine has logged millions of miles and fostered business relationships with thousands of people from all walks of life, both domestic and international. Through his travels and experiences, he has gathered a wealth of knowledge. After 20 years he has decided to put down the suitcase and share what he has learned with you in an effort to help you succeed in the pursuit of your career.

 About the Book: 

Corporate Bullshit: A Survival Guide (Mitchell Publishers Inc., 2009, ISBN: 978-0-9842016-0-0, $29.50) is available at bookstores nationwide and from major online booksellers. 

For more information, please visit www.corporatebsguide.com.

Related Blogs

• ‘That the approach of the Government of Canada must be based on scientific evidence’ – Beyond The Commons – Macleans.ca
• How should the left approach the Union Modernisation Fund? « Though Cowards Flinch
• Blogger’s Successful Approach to Staying Current

Dialogue is an essential component of a story. Through dialogue, we learn about characters’ personalities, we see characters react to events, and we understand the relationships they have with each other. Dialogue allows the reader to visualize scenes. Authors use dialogue to follow the adage “show, don’t tell” what happens.

When we help authors edit manuscripts, we frequently have to solve three common problems with dialogue:

confusion,
stasis, and
displacement.

We use these terms to categorize the three strategies we use to improve dialogue. To help understand these common dialogue problems, let’s look at an example of poor dialogue, study how it illustrates these problems, and then find solutions.

John and Tom walked into the restaurant and sat down.
“Do you know what you want?”
“Not really. I’m hungry enough to eat a horse.”
“You’re in luck. Horse meat is on the menu.”
“You’re kidding, right?”
“Nope. Look at the back page under ‘Chef’s Specials.’ ”
“Holy cow! You’re right. That’s gross.”
“Not really. It’s pretty good, actually.”
“There’s no way I w
ould eat horse meat.”
“You already have.” “Huh?”
“Remember those burgers we ate when I had you for a cookout last month?”
“Please don’t tell me that was horse meat.”
“Ok, I won’t. But you sure enjoyed them.”
“I think I’m going to be sick.”
“Oh, don’t be such a snob. I thought you liked Chinese food.”
“I do, but what’s that got to do with anything?”
“Well, the Chinese eat over a million and a half horses each year.”
“Maybe Mexican food would be better.”
“Same problem. They eat six hundred thousand each year.”
“That’s it. I’m going home for Italian cuisine. No, don’t tell me!”

Obviously, this is a back and forth exchange between two characters, John and Tom. They each talk in turn. In this sample, the reader will learn about each character’s prejudices and the nature of their relationship. In that regard, the dialogue is fine. However, it suffers from confusion, stasis, and displacement.

1. Confusion Problems in Dialogue

Problem: Who is talking? In the sample, which character likes horsemeat and which one is grossed out? You don’t know because the author didn’t tell you. In many dialogues where we see this problem, the author will indicate who is speaking first, or, at a minimum, give the reader a clue. Following that first indication, however, the author leaves the reader to figure out who is speaking, leaving the reader confused.

In this sample, we could indicate that the first speaker is John.

“Do you know what you want?” asked John.

Then, because this is a back and forth exchange, we could figure out who is saying what. After a number of exchanges, though, the reader may lose track and have to study the dialogue carefully, naming the character for each statement: This is John, this is Tom, this is John, this is Tom, etc. Basically, the reader is doing the work the writer should have done.

When you confuse your reader this way, you make the reader work too hard to understand the dialogue. You force the reader to pay attention to the writing, which means the reader is not engaged in the story. Fortunately, this problem has a simple solution.

Solution: Label the speakers. Tell the reader who is speaking. You don’t need to label every line, every few lines is sufficient for the reader to keep track. Also, if you want the reader to focus mainly on one character, only label that character’s speech. Generally, we recommend labeling both, or all, speakers. Following this advice, the sample exchange might include this.

“Please don’t tell me that was horse meat” said Tom.
“Ok, I won’t. But you sure enjoyed them.”
“I think I’m going to be sick.”
“Oh, don’t be such a snob,” said John. “I thought you liked Chinese food.”
“I do, but what’s that got to do with anything?” Tom asked.

Now the reader knows who is speaking. Problem solved.

2. Stasis Problems with Dialogue

Problem: What are the characters doing? “Stasis” means “the state of being motionless.” When people talk, they also act. They move, look, gesture, and inflect. What they don’t do is keep completely still.

To help the reader visualize the scene, the author lets the characters move. These movements are important. Movement shows how they feel about what they hear or say. This shows the reader important information about characters’ feelings and personalities. Movement also helps to clarify who is speaking, which helps with confusion problems. Most importantly, movement during dialogue makes the scene more realistic and engaging to the reader. Look at this pair of sentences.

“Do you know what you want?”
John looked up from his menu and asked, “Do you know what you want?”

The second sentence not only tells us who is speaking (confusion problem) but also shows the reader what John is doing while speaking (stasis problem).

Solution: Include necessary actions. To add realistic, and necessary, movement to dialogue, the author needs to imagine the scene in his or her mind, and then describe what occurs. The challenge for the writer is to determine which actions are necessary to understanding the scene, the characters, or the meaning of the dialogue. For example, the author of this sample could have written the following.

“You already have.”
Tom leaned forward, mouth agape. “Huh?”
“Remember those burgers we ate when I had you for a cookout last month?”
“Please,” Tom said, “don’t tell me that was horse meat.” He put his hands over his ears and scrunched up his face.
“Ok, I won’t,” John said and smiled broadly. “But you sure enjoyed them.”
“I think I’m going to be sick.”

Now the reader knows what the characters are doing. Problem solved.

3. Displacement Problems in Dialogue

Problem: Where is the dialogue occurring? Events happen somewhere. Dialogue occurs in a place, not in a void. It has an environment. The environment includes sights, sounds, smells, and other people. The environment also includes thoughts and memories. Basically, anything that affects the characters’ words and actions are part of the environment. Displaced dialogue, meaning dialogue that occurs in a void, won’t engage the reader, won’t help the reader to visualize the scene, and won’t provide a context for the characters’ actions.

Let’s study one line from the sample and ask questions about the environment.

“Holy cow! You’re right. That’s gross.”
Tom is upset about the fact that the restaurant serves horse meat. That’s pretty obvious from his words. Now, if the restaurant serves it, are the other patrons eating it? Can he detect an unusual smell in the air? If the kitchen door swings open, can he see a horse carcass hanging against the wall? Does Tom know anything about cultures where horse meat is eaten? What are his feelings about horses? This one line is crucial to the rest of the exchange, so let’s put it in place.

Solution: Provide an environment. The author needs to show the environment for the dialogue, i.e., to put the dialogue in a place. When we imagine the scene mentally, we can identify parts of the environment that help the reader to understand the character’s actions and reactions. Think about both the external and internal environment. The external environment includes what occurs around the speakers. The internal environment includes what occurs in the speakers’ minds. This will also help solve confusion and stasis problems. When we put the sample dialogue in place, we get this.

“Holy cow! You’re right.” Tom swept his eyes across the tables in the restaurant. Was anyone actually eating horse? “That’s gross.”
“Not really,” John said and set down his menu. “It’s pretty good, actually.”
The waitress came to take their order. John noted Tom’s discomfort and told her that they would probably need a few more minutes.
Tom leaned in and whispered, “There’s no way I would eat horse meat.”
“You already have.”
“Huh?”
“Remember those burgers we ate when I had you for a cookout last month?”
“Please,” Tom said, “don’t tell me that was horse meat.” He put his hands over his ears and scrunched up his face. He remembered eating two—and enjoying them.

Now the reader knows the environment for the dialogue. Problem solved.

Conclusion

By solving these three problems with writing dialogue—confusion, stasis, and displacement—an author can create dialogue that is important, that interests the reader, and that seems realistic. Take a look at Hemingway’s writing. Earnest Hemingway is known for his minimalist approach to writing, yet he, too, addresses these issues. And few readers would argue against the quality of his writing. Now examine your own writing and ask yourself these questions:

Will the reader know who is speaking?
Are the characters acting in a realistic manner?
Does the dialogue occur in an environment?

We ask these questions when working with clients, and we either advise the authors to revise their manuscripts or we do it ourselves, depending on the level of service. In either case, the result is great dialogue.

How many times have you caught yourself saying that there could be no other solution to a problem and that that problem leads to a dead end? How many times have you felt stumped knowing that the problem laying before you is one you cannot solve. No leads.  No options.  No solutions.  

Did it feel like you had exhausted all possible options and yet are still before the mountain ñ large, unconquerable, and impregnable? When encountering such enormous problems, you may feel like you’re hammering against a steel mountain. The pressure of having to solve such a problem may be overwhelming.

But rejoice! There might be some hope yet!

With some creative problem-solving techniques you may be able to look at your problem in a different light. And that light might just be the end of the tunnel that leads to possible solutions.

First of all, in the light of creative problem-solving, you must be open-minded to the fact that there may be more than just one solution to the problem. And, you must be open to the fact that there may be solutions to problems you thought were unsolvable.

Now, with this optimistic mindset, we can try to be a little bit more creative in solving our problems.

Number one; maybe the reason we cannot solve our problems is that we have not really taken a hard look at what the problem is. Here, trying to understanding the problem and having a concrete understanding of its workings is integral solving the problem. If you know how it works, what the problem is, then you have a better foundation towards solving the problem.

Not trying to make the simple statement of what problem is. Try to identify the participating entities and what their relationships with one another are. Take note of the things you stand to gain any stand to lose from the current problem. Now you have a simple statement of what the problem is.

Number two; try to take note of all of the constraints and assumptions you have the words of problem. Sometimes it is these assumptions that obstruct our view of possible solutions. You have to identify which assumptions are valid, in which assumptions need to be addressed.

Number three; try to solve the problem by parts. Solve it going from general view towards the more detailed parts of the problem. This is called the top-down approach. Write down the question, and then come up with a one-sentence solution to that from them. The solution should be a general statement of what will solve the problem. From here you can develop the solution further, and increase its complexity little by little.

Number four; although it helps to have critical thinking aboard as you solve a problem, you must also keep a creative, analytical voice at the back of your head. When someone comes up with a prospective solution, tried to think how you could make that solution work. Try to be creative. At the same time, look for chinks in the armor of that solution.

Number five; it pays to remember that there may be more than just one solution being developed at one time. Try to keep track of all the solutions and their developments. Remember, there may be more than just one solution to the problem.

Number six; remember that old adage,” two heads are better than one.” That one is truer than it sounds. Always be open to new ideas. You can only benefit from listening to all the ideas each person has. This is especially true when the person you’re talking to has had experience solving problems similar to yours.

You don’t have to be a gung-ho, solo hero to solve the problem. If you can organize collective thought on the subject, it would be much better.

Number seven; be patient. As long as you persevere, there is always a chance that a solution will present itself. Remember that no one was able to create an invention the first time around.

Creative thinking exercises can also help you in your quest be a more creative problems solver.

Here is one example.

Take a piece of paper and write any word that comes to mind at the center. Now look at that word then write the first two words that come to your mind. This can go on until you can build a tree of related words. This helps you build analogical skills, and fortify your creative processes.

So, next time you see a problem you think you can not solve, think again. The solution might just be staring you right in the face. All it takes is just a little creative thinking, some planning, and a whole lot of work.

Related Blogs

• “Serious conservative parties simply cannot shy away from values questions” – Inkless Wells – Macleans.ca
• Money Talks When Animals and (Some) People Cannot « Feminist Law Professors
• You Cannot Escape Batman! – Epic Win FTW