Government, Healthcare, Interviews

Healthcare Conversation with Richard and Joseph Hsieh09 Aug


We are pleased to have the following two guest speakers for our call this Sunday. They are professionals focusing in the healthcare space. And yes they are in fact brothers. Richard is in healthcare investment banking. Joseph is a neurosurgery resident with a background in healthcare policy and public health. We will begin with introductions of each GCG member, and the introduction of our guests. Then start asking questions to begin our discussion. The moderator will initially begin with the following questions:

  • What do you think are the greatest challenges facing the US healthcare delivery system today?
  • What do you think of the White House’s current healthcare reform policy? Is it feasible? Is it the best proposal?
  • What are the greatest barriers to the healthcare reform?
  • What models of healthcare delivery are currently operating at the micro level here or abroad that you think we all could learn from?
  • How are or how should small business respond to the changing financial environment of healthcare funding, financing, and delivery?
Richard Hsieh is currently an associate at Edgemont Capital Partners, which provides investment banking, corporate financial analysis and consultation for healthcare companies in the areas of business acquisitions and mergers, pharmaceutical licensing, private placements of debt and equity, financial valuations of business assets and fairness opinions.Previously he was an analyst with MTS Healthcare Partners (“MTS”), a New York-based healthcare merchant bank, where he worked with middle market and large capitalization healthcare services companies. While with MTS, he executed a range of strategic advisory assignments including merger, acquisition and spin-off transactions. His favorite professional accomplishment was being able to participate in the UnitedHealth acquisition of PacifiCare in 2005. He was raised in the suburbs of Los Angeles, California and moved to the east coast to attend New York University, where he received a Bachelor of Arts in Economics, concentrating on policy.
Joseph C. Hsieh is a senior neurosurgery resident at the University of Chicago Hospitals, and has done primary research on heath and neurosurgery policy.  He completed his BAS in biology and psychology and MS in biology at Stanford University, MBA at the Anderson School of Management at UCLA, MPH at the School of Public Health at UCLA, and MD at Harvard Medical School.  He recently served full time as the Plante public policy fellow for the American Association of Neurological Surgeons/Congress of Neurological Surgeons in Washington D.C. and is continuing his work as socioeconomic fellow for the Council of State Neurosurgical Societies.
Environment, Government, Interviews

Global Environmental Carbon Policy09 Aug


As mounting concern about the ramifications of climate change presses global leaders to look for viable means to reduce carbon emissions, all attention has come to focus on the United States. As one of the largest overall emitters, both in volume and per capita, the decisions made here over the next year will determine the shape and pace of global climate policy over the next decade.  Most have come to agree that linked carbon markets are one of the most feasible ways to price and constrain emissions, though consensus on specific measures will depend heavily on how OECD and industrializing nations are able to reconcile their conflicting perspectives on what is fair, and what is reasonable.  This Sunday evening, our conversation will focus on the primary policy vehicles under consideration, the roadblocks and the possible avenues for collaboration in addressing what may prove to be the most important international issue and diplomatic challenge of the 21st century.

With ever increasing levels of carbon emissions and their threat to global warming, a fiercely deliberated issue has been around what is the best way to structure a global environmental policy. With Clinton’s recent visit to India and China’s hard stance during the G8 talks clearly showing the unwillingness of the developing countries to accept limits set by the developed nations, an interesting and timely topic for GCG members to discuss would be the issue of international environmental policy. In specific, we would like to discuss the following questions:

  • 1) Is it fair for the developed nations to impose carbon emission limits and increase tariffs on goods imported from developing countries and hence hinder their industrial development?
  • 2) What would be an effective & fair policy which would both not hinder industrial development of the emerging nations and at the same time limit carbon emissions?

The following articles will serve as guiding material for our discussion:

1) Poor countries wrangle with rich ones about who can burn what and when? (

2) How to Set Greenhouse Gas Emission Targets for All Countries?

Our guest speaker, Allison Shapiro, is a carbon markets specialist that has spoken to audiences across the globe on these looming issues.

Allison Shapiro Bio

Allison Shapiro is a Program Associate in the Carbon Markets program of the Ecosystem Marketplace. At Ecosystem Marketplace, she has contributed to the 2008 and 2009 ‘State of the Voluntary Carbon Markets’ reports, writes for the V-Carbon News, and updated the second edition of the book Voluntary Carbon Markets: A Business Guide to What They Are and How They Work. She was also a contributor to an Ecosystem Marketplace study on conservation banking in the United States for the information clearinghouse Before joining Ecosystem Marketplace, Allison worked at ICF International, where she provided environmental management support to US federal government and foreign clients. Allison holds a BS degree in Science, Technology, and International Affairs with a concentration in Environmental Studies from Georgetown University. She speaks English and Spanish.  This coming year she will be attending Michigan Business School.


Catalyst Conversation: The Obama Campaign09 Aug


Prepared by : Alex Johnston and Ryan Coleman

The GCG discussion focused on the wild success of the Obama Campaign. Members sought to want to determine what differentiated this campaign from previous campaigns and social movements and evaluated this campaign in terms of the Message, Tactics and Tools that were used.

Obama’s campaign was rooted in a message: CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN. This mantra along with the tools that were made available empowered and engaged the masses to become involved.

Key questions included:

  • Can this campaign be replicated?
  • What was unique about the tools and the strategies made available to cause the masses to swarm towards this movement?
  • What role did the image, brand, character and passion of the leader (President Elect Obama) play in the success of the campaign/movement? Could other figures be plugged into the Obama Machine and still be as successful?
  • Having the message, tactics and tools are useful but showing the masses how to use these strategies to get involved and take ownership in the movement is the pinnacle of the Obama Success. What key points from the implementation of the Obama Strategy can we translate into our current organizations?
  • What are the key factors in its success? What other fields or industries could this approach be applied to?
    Can we make any predictions about how these changes will affect the future of the democratic system?

Government Intervention on Private Industry09 Aug


Prepared by Stephen McMullin

GCG seeks to examine the philosophical as well as the moral ramification of the government’s direct intervention into private industry and, perhaps more specifically, the ideal of capitalism.

US economic strength has a deep and rich history founded, at its most basic level, in property rights. America encourages its citizens to be entrepreneurs and to measure for themselves the tradeoffs between risk and reward. She does this through providing her citizenship with the necessary tools through which an individual can protect his claim.  Such protection provides the necessary foundation for capitalism

Capitalism- noun- an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state owned means of wealth.

The recent economic turmoil, however, has forced America to intervene in this ideal in unprecedented ways. In order to preserve capitalism, she must undermine one of its most basic premises. She has acquired and, in some cases claimed, multi-asset class positions in private companies. As a result, she has altered the risk-reward tradeoff, tread on the property rights of equity shareholders, and effectively nationalized pieces of private industry.

Is this intervention just?

Is it just for any person or any institution to undermine any ideal for the preservation of itself or the promotion of another, seemingly higher concept?

Consider the following scenarios:

  • 1) A freedom based government that acquires and detains citizens for the protection of the greater population (Japanese detainment camps after Pearl Harbor)
  • 2) A liberty based government that wire-taps its citizens for the protection of the greater population
  • 3) A politician who lies to get elected, only to serve his community with unrelenting commitment (fill in your example of choice)


  • - Are there other illustrations? If so, what?
  • - Is this a question of degree? Is intervention acceptable to a point?
  • - Is this binary? Can an “ideal” not be compromised?
  • - Does such intervention devalue the “ideal”?
  • - What does the need for such intervention prove, if anything?

Our Mantra

The Global Catalyst Group seeks to gather persons of unique potential into a community dedicated to thought leadership, shared resources, and mutual improvement. Through deliberate collaboration, collective mentorship and continuous dialogue we believe that we can support and stretch one another with meaningful insight and thoughtful guidance. We encourage our membership and partners to exercise, together, their ambition, creativity, and both their professional and social networks to pursue a greater purpose than oneself. We challenge them to leave a legacy and we support one another towards this end.

Contact Us

We are actively exploring new opportunities to connect and collaborate on projects that add value to our mission. Contact us to start the conversation.