Colbert's market reforms included the foundation of the Manufacture royale de glaces de miroirs in 1665 to supplant the importation of Venetian glass (forbidden in 1672, as soon as French glass manufacture was on a sound basis) and to encourage the technical expertise of Flemish cloth manufacturing in France. He also founded royal tapestry works at Gobelins and supported that at Beauvais. Colbert worked to improve the economy via tariffs and the construction of internal improvements. In regard to foreign markets, Colbert aimed to ensure that the French East India Company could obtain coffee, cotton, dyewoods, fur, pepper, and sugar. In addition, Colbert founded a French merchant marine.
Colbert issued more than 150 edicts to regulate the guilds. One such law had the intention of improving the quality of cloth. The edict declared that if the authorities found a merchant's cloth unsatisfactory on three separate occasions, they were to tie him to a post with the cloth attached to him.
Early life
Colbert's father operated as a clothier in his birthplace of Reims, France. He claimed to have Scottish ancestry. A general (but unconfirmed) belief exists that he spent his early youth at a Jesuit college, working for a Parisian banker, as well as working for the father of Jean Chapelain. In 1640, at the age of 21, Colbert had the post of commissaire ordinaire des guerres in the war office; a position generally attributed to the marriage of an uncle to the sister of Secretary of War Le Tellier. Colbert's father Nicolas, however, used his political position and wealth to purchase the title for his son. Colbert's role as commissaire was to inspect troops; this would become an important position and one that would propel him into notoriety in 1648 with the events of the Fronde. In 1648, he married Marie Charron, a daughter of a member of the king's council. Her dowry was 100,000 livres. The marriage contract also mentioned Colbert's 50,000 livres "deriving from his profession"
The Fronde and later revolts
The Fronde lasted from 1647 to 1653. Twice in 1651 and 1652, Cardinal Mazarin was forced into exile. Colbert served as an intermediary between the royal court, as it moved about in the provinces, Cardinal Mazarin in exile and Le Tellier, who was working to coordinate the war efforts in Spain and Paris simultaneously. It was at this time that Colbert's presence would soon become familiar with the powerful cardinal, the queen and her son Louis XIV. In April 1655, Colbert published a notable letter in defence of the cardinal. In 1659, Colbert helped suppress the revolts in Normandy, Anjou and Poitou, events which resulted in the execution of Bonnesson.
The death of Mazarin and Colbert's rise
While Mazarin was in exile, Louis' trust in Colbert grew. In 1652 Colbert was asked to manage the affairs of the Cardinal while he was away. This new responsibility would detach Colbert from his other responsibility as commissaire des guerres. Although Colbert was not a supporter of Mazarin in principle, he would defend the cardinal's interests with unflagging devotion.
Colbert's earliest recorded attempt at tax reform came in the form of a mémoire to Mazarin, showing that of the taxes paid by the people, not one-half reached the King. The paper also contained an attack upon the Superintendent Fouquet. The postmaster of Paris, a spy of Fouquet's, read the letter, leading to a dispute which Mazarin attempted to suppress.
In 1661, Mazarin died and Colbert "made sure of the King's favour" by revealing the location of some of Mazarin's hidden wealth. In January 1664 Colbert became the Superintendent of buildings; in 1665 he became Controller-General of Finances; in 1669, he became Secrectary of State of the Navy; he also gained appointments as minister of commerce, of the colonies and of the palace. In short, Colbert acquired power in every department except that of war.
A great financial and fiscal reform at once claimed all his energies. Not only the nobility, but many others who had no legal claim to exemption, paid no taxes; the bulk of the burden fell on the wretched country-folk. Supported by the young king Louis XIV, Colbert aimed the first blow at the man accused of being the greatest of the royal embezzlers, the superintendent Nicolas Fouquet. Fouquet's fall, it should be noted, simultaneously secured Colbert's own advancement.
Economic reform
With the abolition of the office of superintendent and of many other offices dependent upon it, the supreme control of the finances became vested in a royal council. The sovereign functioned as its president; but Colbert, though for four years he only possessed the title of intendant, operated as its ruling spirit, having had great personal authority conferred upon him by the king. One must not judge the career on which Colbert now entered without remembering the corruption of the previous financial administration. His ruthlessness in this case, dangerous precedent as it gave, seemed perhaps necessary; the council could not respect individual interests. When he had severely punished guilty officials, he turned his attention to the fraudulent creditors of the government. Colbert had a simple method of operation. He repudiated some of the public loans, and cut off from others a percentage, which varied, at first according to his own decision, and afterwards according to that of the council which he established to examine all claims against the state.
Much more serious difficulties met his attempts to introduce equality in the pressure of the taxes on the various classes. To diminish the number of the privileged proved impossible, but Colbert firmly resisted false claims for exemption, and lightened the unjust direct taxation by increasing the indirect taxes, from which the privileged could not escape. At the same time he immensely improved the mode of collection.
Colbertism
Having thus introduced a measure of order and economy into the workings of the government, Colbert now called for the enrichment of the country by commerce. The state, through Colbert's dirigiste policies, fostered manufacturing enterprises in a wide variety of fields. The authorities established new industries, protected inventors, invited in workmen from foreign countries, and prohibited French workmen from emigrating. To maintain the character of French goods in foreign markets, as well as to afford a guarantee to the home consumer, Colbert had the quality and measure of each article fixed by law, punishing breaches of the regulations by public exposure of the delinquent and by destruction of the goods concerned, and, on the third offence, by the pillory. But whatever advantage resulted from this rule, the disadvantages it entailed more than outweighed them. Colbert prohibited the production of qualities which would have suited many purposes of consumption, and the odious supervision which became necessary involved great waste of time and a stereotyped regularity which resisted all improvements. Other parts of Colbert's schemes have met with less equivocal condemnation.
By his firm maintenance of the corporation system, each industry remained in the hands of certain privileged bourgeois; in this way, too, the system greatly discouraged improvement; while the lower classes found opportunities of advancement closed. With regard to international commerce Colbert suffered equally from lack of foresight: the tariffs he devised protected commerce to an extreme. He did, however, wisely consult the interests of internal commerce. Unable to abolish the duties on the passage of goods from province to province, he did what he could to induce the provinces to equalise them. Currency exchange rates still remained between these provinces despite a policy focusing on the unification of French trade. His régime improved roads and canals. Pierre Paul Riquet (1604–1680) planned and constructed the Canal du Midi under Colbert's patronage. To encourage overseas trade with the Levant, Senegal, Guinea and other places, Colbert granted privileges to companies, but, like the noted French East India Company, all proved unsuccessful. The narrowness and rigidity of the government regulations significantly contributed to this collapse, as well as the failure of the colonies, upon which Colbert had bestowed a great deal of energy and political capital
Religion
Even ecclesiastical affairs, though with these he had no official concern, did not altogether escape Colbert's attention. He took a subordinate part in the struggle between the king and the papacy as to the royal rights over vacant bishoprics; and he seems to have sympathised with the proposal that suggested seizing part of the wealth of the clergy. In his hatred of idleness he ventured to suppress no less than seventeen fêtes, and he had a project for lessening the number of persons devoted to clerical and monastic life, by fixing the age for taking the vows some years later than the then customary time. He showed himself at first unwilling to interfere with heresy, for he realised the commercial value of the Huguenots (French Protestants), who were well represented among the merchant classes; but when the king resolved to make all France Roman Catholic, he followed him and urged his subordinates to do all that they could to promote conversions.
Culture
In art and literature Colbert took much interest. He possessed a remarkably fine private library, which he delighted to fill with valuable manuscripts from every part of Europe where France had placed a consul. He has the honour of having founded the Academy of Sciences (now part of the Institut de France), the Paris Observatory, which he employed Claude Perrault to build and brought Giovanni Domenico Cassini (1625–1712) from Italy to superintend, the Academies of Inscriptions and Medals, of Architecture and of Music, the French Academy at Rome, and Academies at Arles, Soissons, Nimes and many other towns. He reorganised the Academy of Painting and Sculpture which Mazarin had established. He himself became a member of the Académie française; and proposed one very characteristic rule with the intention of expediting the great Dictionary, in which he had a great interest: no one could count as present at any meeting unless he arrived before the hour of commencement and remained till the hour for leaving. In 1673 Colbert presided over the first exhibition of the works of living painters; and he enriched the Louvre with hundreds of pictures and statues. He gave many pensions to men of letters, among whom we find Molière, Corneille, Racine, Boileau, P D Huet (1630–1721) and Antoine Varillas (1626–1696); and even foreigners, as Huygens, Carlo Dati the Dellacruscan. Evidence exists to show that by this munificence he hoped to draw out praises of his sovereign and himself; but this motive certainly does not account for all the splendid, if in some cases specious, services that he rendered to literature, science and art.
Death
Colbert worked incessantly hard until his final hours. Working was his religion; he once pondered whether it was better to rise early and work or sleep very late and work. He concluded that rising early and sleeping late would be the ideal combination. However at the age of 68 he suffered from stomach aches which caused him much distress. He was reduced to eating moist bread dipped in chicken broth for his meals. By 69 he was bedridden and 4 days after his birthday he died. The surgeons that operated on him found that he was suffering from kidney stones. A huge stone was found in his urinary tract, which would explain why he was in such writhing agony.
Rabu, 04 Juni 2008
Jean-Baptiste Colbert
Irving Fischer
Irving Fisher was one of America's greatest mathematical economists and one of the clearest economics writers of all time. He had the intellect to use mathematics in virtually all his theories and the good sense to introduce it only after he had clearly explained the central principles in words. And he explained very well. Fisher's Theory of Interest is written so clearly that graduate economics students, who still study it today, often find that they can read—and understand—half the book in one sitting. With other writings in technical economics, this is unheard of.
Although he damaged his reputation by insisting throughout the Great Depression that recovery was imminent, contemporary economic models of interest and capital are based on Fisherian principles. Similarly, monetarism is founded on Fisher's principles of money and prices.
Fisher called interest "an index of a community's preference for a dollar of present [income] over a dollar of future income." He labeled his theory of interest the "impatience and opportunity" theory. Interest rates, Fisher postulated, result from the interaction of two forces: the "time preference" people have for capital now, and the investment opportunity principle (that income invested now will yield greater income in the future). This reasoning sounds very much like Böhm-Bawerk's. Indeed, Fisher's Theory of Interest was dedicated to "the memory of John Rae and of Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, who laid the foundations upon which I have endeavored to build." But Fisher objected to Böhm-Bawerk's idea that roundaboutness necessarily increases production. Instead, argued Fisher, at a positive interest rate, no one would ever choose a longer period unless it were more productive. So if we look at processes selected, we do find that longer periods are more productive. But, he argued, the length of the period does not in itself contribute to productivity.
Fisher defined capital as any asset that produces a flow of income over time. A flow of income, said Fisher, was distinct from the stock of capital that generated it. Capital and income are linked by the interest rate. Specifically, wrote Fisher, the value of capital is the present value of the flow of (net) income that the asset generates. This still is how economists think about capital and income today.
Fisher also opposed conventional income taxation and favored a tax on consumption to replace it. His position followed directly from his capital theory. When people save out of current income and then use the savings to invest in capital goods that yield income later, noted Fisher, they are being taxed on the income that they used to buy the capital goods and then are being taxed later on the income that the capital generates. This, he said, is double taxation of saving, and biases the tax code against saving and in favor of consumption. Fisher's reasoning is still used by economists today in making the case for consumption taxes.
Fisher was a pioneer in the construction and use of price indexes. James Tobin of Yale has called Fisher "the greatest expert of all time on index numbers." Indeed, from 1923 to 1936, his own Index Number Institute computed price indexes from all over the world.
Fisher was also the first economist to distinguish clearly between real and nominal interest rates. He pointed out that the real interest rate is equal to the nominal interest rate (the one we observe) minus the expected inflation rate. If the nominal interest rate is 12 percent, for example, but people expect inflation of 7 percent, then the real interest rate is only 5 percent. Again, this is still the basic understanding of modern economists.
Fisher laid out a more modern quantity theory of money (i.e., monetarism) than had been done before. He formulated his theory in terms of the Equation of Exchange, which says that MV = PT, where M equals the stock of money; V equals velocity, or how quickly money circulates in an economy; P equals the price level; and T equals the total volume of transactions. Again, modern economists still draw on this equation, although they usually use the version MV = Py, where y stands for real income.
The equation can be a very powerful tool for checking the consistency of one's thinking about the economy. Indeed, Reagan economist Beryl Sprinkel, who was Treasury undersecretary for monetary affairs in 1981, used this equation to criticize his colleague David Stockman's economic forecasts. Sprinkel pointed out that the only way Stockman's assumptions about the growth of income, the inflation rate, and the growth of the money supply could prove true would be if velocity increased faster than it ever had before. As it turned out, velocity actually declined.
Irving Fisher was born in upstate New York in 1867. He gained an eclectic education at Yale, studying science and philosophy. He published poetry and works on astronomy, mechanics, and geometry. But his greatest concentration was on mathematics and economics, the latter having no academic department at Yale. Nonetheless, Fisher earned the first Ph.D. in economics ever awarded by Yale. Upon graduation he stayed at Yale for the rest of his career.
A three-year struggle with tuberculosis beginning in 1898 left Fisher with a profound interest in health and hygiene. He took up vegetarianism and exercise and wrote a national best-seller titled How to Live: Rules for Healthful Living Based on Modern Science, whose value he demonstrated by living until age eighty. He campaigned for Prohibition, peace, and eugenics. He was founder or president of numerous associations and agencies, including the Econometric Society and the American Economic Association. He was also a successful inventor. In 1925 his firm, which held the patent on his "visible card index" system, merged with its main competitor to form what later was known as Remington Rand and then Sperry Rand. Although the merger made him very wealthy, he lost a large part of his wealth in the stock market crash of 1929.
Baca selengkapnya..
Senin, 12 Mei 2008
Karl Marx (1818 - 1883)
Karl Marx, pelopor utama gagasan "sosialisme ilmiah" dilahirkan tahun 1818 di kota Trier, Jerman, Ayahnya ahli hukum dan di umur tujuh belas tahun Karl masuk Universitas Bonn,juga belajar hukum. Belakangan dia pindah ke Universitas Berlin dan kemudian dapat gelar Doktor dalam ilmu filsafat dari Universitas Jena.
Entah karena lebih tertarik, Marx menceburkan diri ke dunia jurnalistik dan sebentar menjadi redaktur Rheinische Zeitung di Cologne. Tapi, pandangan politiknya yang radikal menyeretnya ke dalam rupa-rupa kesulitan dan memaksanya pindah ke Paris. Di situlah dia mula pertama bertemu dengan Friederich Engels. Tali persahabatan dan persamaan pandangan politik mengikat kedua orang ini selaku dwi tunggal hingga akhir hayatnya.
Marx tak bisa lama tinggal di Paris dan segera ditendang dari sana dan mesti menjinjing koper pindah ke Brussel. Di kota inilah, tahun 1847 dia pertama kali menerbitkan buah pikirannya yang penting dan besar The poverty of philosophy (Kemiskinan filsafat). Tahun berikutnya bersama bergandeng tangan dengan Friederich Engels mereka menerbitkan Communist Manifesto, buku yang akhirnya menjadi bacaan dunia. Pada tahun itu juga Marx kembali ke Cologne untuk kemudian diusir lagi dari sana hanya selang beberapa bulan. Sehabis terusir sana terusir sini, akhirnya Marx menyeberang Selat Canal dan menetap di London hingga akhir hayatnya.
Meskipun ada hanya sedikit uang di koceknya berkat pekerjaan jurnalistik, Marx menghabiskan sejumlah besar waktunya di London melakukan penyelidikan dan menulis buku-buku tentang politik dan ekonomi. (Di tahun-tahun itu Marx dan familinya dapat bantuan ongkos hidup dari Friederich Engels kawan karibnya). Jilid pertama Das Kapital, karya ilmiah Marx terpenting terbit di tahun 1867. Tatkala Marx meninggal di tahun 1883, kedua jilid sambungannya belum sepenuhnya rampung. Kedua jilid sambungannya itu disusun dan diterbitkan oIeh Engels berpegang pada catatan-catatan dan naskah yang ditinggalkan Marx.
Karya tulisan Marx merumuskan dasar teoritis Komunisme. Ditilik dari perkembangan luarbiasa gerakan ini di abad ke-20, sangat layaklah kalau dia mendapat tempat dalam urutan tinggi buku ini. Masalahnya, seberapa tinggi?
Faktor utama bagi keputusan ini adalah perhitungan arti penting Komunis jangka panjang dalam sejarah. Sejak tumbuhnya Komunisme sebagai bagian tak terpisahkan dari sejarah masa kini, terasa sedikit sulit menentukan dengan cermat perspektif masa depannya. Kendati tak seorang pun sanggup memastikan seberapa jauh Komunisme bisa berkembang dan berapa lama ideologi ini bisa bertahan, yang sudah pasti dia merupakan ideologi kuat dan tangguh serta berakar kuat menghunjam ke bumi, dan sudah bisa dipastikan punya pengaruh besar di dunia untuk paling sedikit beberapa abad mendatang.
Pada saat kini, sekitar seabad sesudah kematian Marx, jumlah manusia yang sedikitnya terpengaruh oleh Marxisme sudah mendekati angka 1,3 milyar banyaknya. Jumlah penganut ini lebih besar dari jumlah penganut ideologi mana pun sepanjang sejarah manusia. Bukan sekedar jumlahnya yang mutlak, melainkan juga sebagai kelompok dari keseluruhan penduduk dunia. Ini mengakibatkan kaum Komunis, dan juga sebagian yang bukan Komunis, percaya bahwa di masa depan tidak bisa tidak Marxisme akan merebut kemenangan di seluruh dunia. Namun, adalah sukar untuk memantapkan kebenarannya dengan keyakinan yang tak bergoyah. Telah banyak contoh-contoh ideologi yang tampaknya sangat punya pengaruh penting pada jamannya tapi pada akhirnya melayu dan sirna. (Agama yang didirikan oleh Mani bisa dijadikan misal yang menarik). Jika kita surut ke tahun 1900, akan tampak jelas bahwa demokrasi konstitusional merupakan arus yang akan jadi anutan masa depan. Berpegang pada harapan, tampaknya memang begitu, tapi sekarang tak ada lagi orang yang yakin segalanya sudah terjadi sebagaimana bayangan semula.
Sekarang menyangkut Komunisme. Taruhlah seseorang percaya sangat dan tahu persis betapa hebatnya pengaruh Komunis di dunia saat ini dan di dunia masa depan, orang toh masih mempertanyakan arti penting Karl Marx di dalam gerakan Komunis. Politik pemerintah Uni Soviet sekarang kelihatannya tidak terawasi oleh karya-karya Marx yang menulis dasar-dasar pikiran seperti dialektika gaya Hegel dan tentang teori "nilai lebih." Teori-teori itu kelihatan kecil pengaruhnya dalam praktek perputaran roda politik pemerintah Uni Soviet, baik politik dalam maupun luar negerinya.
Komunisme masa kini menitikberatkan empat ide: (1) Sekelumit kecil orang kaya hidup dalam kemewahan yang berlimpah, sedangkan kaum pekerja yang teramat banyak jumlahnya hidup bergelimang papa sengsara. (2) Cara untuk merombak ketidakadilan ini adalah dengan jalan melaksanakan sistem sosialis, yaitu sistem di mana alat produksi dikuasai negara dan bukannya oleh pribadi swasta. (3) Pada umumnya, satu-satunya jalan paling praktis untuk melaksanakan sistem sosialis ini adalah lewat revolusi kekerasan. (4) Untuk menjaga kelanggengan sistem sosialis harus diatur oleh kediktatoran partai Komunis dalam jangka waktu yang memadai.
Tiga dari ide pertama sudah dicetuskan dengan jelas sebelum Marx. Sedangkan ide keempat berasal dari gagasan Marx mengenai "diktatur proletariat." Sementara itu, lamanya masa berlaku kediktatoran Soviet sekarang lebih merupakan hasil dari langkah-langkah Lenin dan Stalin daripada gagasan tulisan Marx. Hal ini tampaknya menimbulkan anggapan bahwa pengaruh Marx dalam Komunisme lebih kecil dari kenyataan yang sebenarnya, dan penghargaan orang terhadap tulisan-tulisannya lebih menyerupai sekedar etalasi untuk membenarkan sifat "keilmiahan" daripada ide dan politik yang sudah terlaksana dan diterima.
Sementara boleh jadi ada benarnya juga anggapan itu, namun tampaknya kelewat berlebihan. Lenin misalnya, tidak sekedar menganggap dirinya mengikuti ajaran-ajaran Marx, tapi dia betul-betul membacanya, menghayatinya, dan menerimanya. Dia yakin betul jalan yang dilimpahkannya persis di atas rel yang dibentangkan Marx. Begitu juga terjadi pada diri Mao Tse Tung dan pemuka-pemuka Komunis lain. Memang benar, ide-ide Marx mungkin sudah disalah-artikan dan ditafsirkan lain, tapi hal semacam ini juga berlaku pada ajaran Yesus atau Buddha atau Islam. Andaikata semua politik dasar pemerintah Tiongkok maupun Uni Soviet bertolak langsung dari hasil karya tulisan Marx, dia akan peroleh tingkat urutan lebih tinggi dalam daftar buku ini.
Mungkin bisa diperdebatkan bahwa Lenin, politikus praktis yang sesungguhnya mendirikan negara Komunis, memegang saham besar dalam hal membangun Komunisme sebagai suatu ideologi yang begitu besar pengaruhnya di dunia. Pendapat ini masuk akal. Lenin benar-benar seorang tokoh penting. Tapi, menurut hemat saya, tulisan-tulisan Marx yang begitu hebat pengaruhnya terhadap jalan pikiran bukan saja Lenin tapi juga pemuka-pemuka Komunis lain, jelas punya kedudukan lebih penting.
Juga ada peluang untuk diperdebatkan apakah penghargaan atas terumusnya Marxisme tidak harus dibagi antara Karl Marx dan Friederich Engels. Mereka berdua menulis "Manifesto Komunis" dan Engels jelas punya pengaruh mendalam terhadap penyelesaian final Das Kapital. Meskipun masing-masing menulis buku atas namanya sendiri-sendiri tapi kerjasama intelektual mereka begitu intimnya sehingga hasil keseluruhan dapat dianggap sebagai suatu karya bersama. Memang, Marx dan Engels diperlakukan sebagai satu kesatuan dalam buku ini walaupun yang dicantumkan cuma nama Marx karena (saya pikir saya benar) dia dianggap partner yang dominan dalam arti luas.
Akhirnya, sering dituding orang bahwa teori Marxis di bidang ekonomi sangatlah buruk dan banyak keliru. Tentu saja, banyak dugaan-dugaan tertentu Marx terbukti meleset. Misalnya, Marx meramalkan bahwa dalam negeri-negeri kapitalis kaum buruh akan semakin melarat dalam perjalanan sang waktu. Jelas, ramalan ini tidak terbukti. Marx juga memperhitungkan bahwa kaum menengah akan disapu dan sebagian besar orang-orangnya akan masuk ke dalam golongan proletar dan hanya sedikit yang bisa bangkit dan masuk dalam kelas kapitalis. Ini pun jelas tak pernah terbukti. Marx juga tampaknya percaya, meningkatnya mekanisasi akan mengurangi keuntungan kaum kapitalis, kepercayaan yang bukan saja salah tapi sekaligus juga tampak tolol. Tapi, terlepas apakah teori ekonominya benar atau salah, semua itu tidak ada sangkut-pautnya dengan pengaruh Marx. Arti penting seorang filosof terletak bukan pada kebenaran pendapatnya tapi terletak pada masalah apakah buah pikirannya telah menggerakkan orang untuk bertindak atau tidak. Diukur dari sudut ini, tak perlu diragukan lagi Karl Marx punya arti penting yang luarbiasa hebatnya.
Kamis, 17 April 2008
James Gwee
James is the Director of Academia Education & Training,
a Training and Consultancy company based in Singapore.
His specialty lies in the areas of Sales, Motivation, Service Excellence, Leadership, Managerial Skills, Team Building and Personal Development
Although a Singaporean, James has vast experience conducting training for Indonesians, having conducted more than 1,200 In-House training for more than 680 organizations in Indonesia. Till date, more than 66,000 people have attended his public seminars. His clients cover a wide spectrum of business, including banks, insurance, tour & travel, real estate developers, manufacturing, transportation, hospitals, Telecommunication and even public utilities.
James’ dynamic, friendly and informal approach, combined with his unique combination of Bahasa Indonesia and English is so full of spontaneity and humor that his training and seminars are a truly enjoyable learning experience. This makes him the Top Sales Trainer and Speaker in Indonesia today. James has been invited to speak in many prestigious events all over Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, South Africa, India and even Moscow.
His radio talkshows in Radio Smart FM are listened by thousands of listeners in 13 cities in Indonesa (Jakarta, Bandung, Surabaya, Semarang, Solo, Jogja, Palembang, Makassar, Manado, Banjarmasin, Balikpapan, Pontianak and Batam)
James Gwee is currently holding the following positions :
• Director, Academia Education & Training
• Director, Tomas Music Consultants
• Host of Smart Business Talk, Radio Smart FM
• Voted “Top 10 Seminar Speaker In Indonesia” by Tabloid Marketing
• Dewan Juri Indonesai Sales Award 2004, 2005
• Honorary Member Indonesia Marketing Associastion
