Category Archives: Editorial

Legendary HBCU Businessman & St. Paul’s College Graduate Passes Away At 91

By William A. Foster, IV

“The Negro girl who goes to college hardly wants to return to her mother if she is a washerwoman, but this girl should come back with sufficient knowledge of physics and chemistry and business administration to use her mother’s work as a nucleus for a modern steam laundry.” – Dr. Carter G. Woodson

trower[1]

The father of African American history month, Carter G. Woodson often talked of the fact that many African Americans go off and become educated only to leave behind the knowledge and experience their parents or grandparents had accumulated. Instead of merging the experiences of their forebears with their new education and building opportunities, much too often we are wondering in the “wilderness” with an education and no place to use it. This would not be the case for William H. Trower, an alum of Saint Paul’s Polytechnic Institute (later St. Paul’s College) in Lawrecenville, VA.

He would cut his teeth at St. Paul’s College studying tailoring. Mr. Trower would also spend time in the US Calvary and Infantry during World War II.  Accumulating skills at both stops that would serve him well upon taking over the family business. He served as President of Trower Cleaners, Inc, a dry-cleaning company founded by his father and mother. The company at its height expanded to four stores in the Pittsburgh area. It would eventually be sold in 1991 after serving the community for almost seven decades.

Mr. Trower’s legacy and story is beyond just business. His wife of 61 years, Clara Belle Willoughby, and their three sons survives him. A man who truly valued the love and comforts of family. He also is survived by a plethora of grandchildren, nephews, and nieces. One of his nieces, Sharon Epperson of CNBC, is a business star in her uncle’s footsteps and is one of the most prominent financial journalist in America.

There are many lessons we can learn from our HBCUpreneurs and HBCU professionals. Mr. Trower’s lesson shows us that we must not forsake the knowledge of our forbears for fancy titles or faux acceptance by others, but embrace their experiences, knowledge, and build upon it. In doing so we embrace the value of our past, create opportunity today, and leave infinite possibilities for tomorrow. William H. Trower passed away on January 31st, 2014, but he assured his lessons and legacy are living on through his family and the community he impacted.

HBCU Money™ Turns The Terri(fic) Two

By William A. Foster, IV

Knowledge comes by taking things apart: analysis. But wisdom comes by putting things together. — John A. Morrison

toddler-on-laptop

A labor of love. That is what I would have to describe the past two years. An opportunity to change the paradigm. That is what I would describe the ongoing mission of HBCU Money. From the moment of HBCU Money’s conception two years ago (wow, time flies) the intention to become a full-service multimedia financial journalism company was present. We believe that at our footsteps is an opportunity to be at the forefront of economic, financial, and investment information focused on business, countries, and organizations of the Diaspora. An opportunity, that we plan to be at the vanguard of over the coming years. I want to thank everyone for their support, feedback, and suggestions in ways that we can improve the product and service that HBCU Money™ brings to the world. Check out some of the amazing highlights from our terrific second year in business.

  • If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 14 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
  • Our viewership is up over 600 percent from year one!
  • The busiest day of the year was July 23rd. The most popular post that day was HBCU Money’s 2013 African American Owned Bank Directory.
  • There were visitors to our site from 122 countries. Meaning our viewership has reached 63 percent of the world’s countries!

It is a continued honor to serve as Editor-In-Chief of HBCU Money™ and look forward continuing to do so. There is no time to rest. Enjoy the moment. Now, let us get back to work because as our motto states “Our Money Matters”.

Washington Was The Horse And DuBois Was The Cart – We Put The Cart Before The Horse

The first point of wisdom is to discern that which is false; the second to know that which is true. – Lactantius

booker_t_vs_w.e.b

Recent events at Barney’s (and many others like it) and the outrage that followed by African Americans reminded me of a truth. We are not a self-dependent community. Asian and European America have created such ecosystems that when they choose to do business or engage outside of their ecosystem it is a choice, not a necessity. Yet, we continue to be baffled by the actions of other groups toward us. Maybe we do not comprehend that just like African American-owned businesses there are Asian and European-American owned businesses built to cater to their own community. Despite being baffled, we continue to allow ourselves to be reliant on their social, economic, and political institutions. Does it spur us to become more self-dependent? No, it spurs us to force others to allow us to be more dependent. The logic is baffling at best, but on a whole it is just sad.

Often I ponder what African America would look like if over the past sixty years we had focused on the building of our social, economic, and political institutions instead of forcing our way into others. What if we had continued the institutional building of our forebears in the early twentieth century  that eventually would be led by those classically trained at our institutions. The ideological differences between Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. DuBois were as different as night and day goes without saying. Booker T. Washington’s approach was that we do not agitate but focus on building our own institutions independent of other groups. To ensure that we were self-reliant prior to engaging. If one takes a more geostrategic view, Washington’s approach has been what China as a country has done the past forty plus years. Coming from the bottom of development to now the world’s number two economy. Prior to allowing any foreign companies into their country, they worked on building their own. This allowed them to export and generate revenues to continue to build up their own industries that could compete on a global scale. It also allowed them the ability to dictate terms when foreigners entered their country because they would not need or be dependent upon them. African America chose to follow the W.E.B. DuBois approach that promoted our talented tenth agitate and force our way into other communities’ institutions. This logic has led us to mis-celebrating often the achievement of the first African American to enter any institution that are not our own and thinking of it as progress.

Was DuBois wrong all together? Absolutely not. He was right. We needed classically trained citizens. The problem and we see it manifest today, is that other groups are only going to allow a certain number (quota) of other groups to breach their institutions. A number that allows them to feign inclusion all the while maintaining social, economic, and political control. But what of the rest? For every ten we train and produce there will be only one let in, but what of the other nine? This is the conundrum that we are faced with today. If we are looking for explanations of why the unemployment rate continues to be in double digits for African Americans – look no further than our overly trained population and under built institutional development.

“What Negroes are now being taught does not bring their minds into harmony with life as they must face it”, said Carter G. Woodson in The Mis-education of the Negro. He goes on to give an example of just where we are failing between vocational knowledge and classical education – and it applies to us as much today as it did when he wrote the book. “The Negro girl who goes to college hardly wants to return to her mother if she is a washerwoman, but this girl should come back with sufficient knowledge of physics and chemistry and business administration to use her mother’s work as a nucleus for a modern steam laundry.” Truer words have never been more spoken and as I said still as relevant today. Our students do not know how to own their fields. Many HBCUs spend more time promoting the access of their students into companies, graduate schools, and other organizations not controlled by us as validation of their fine work. Are they training their finance students to go off and improve the state of African American owned banks? No, a problem that continues to rear its ugly head in the amount of redlining and predatory lending that happens in our community. At this point our horse is so underweight it does not even have the strength to pull our cart.

It is time we reset our priorities. Focus on building institutions that are in our interest. We are not a self-dependent people and the things we do have are too few to support a nation of forty million. This was largely the point Washington was trying to stress. I do not believe he was against what DuBois wanted. He just had insight to know we needed to build institutions first so that those classically trained had some place to go upon completion. Instead, many of us continue to operate under the illusion of simply getting a degree or going to an HWCU will somehow grant me entrance and inclusion. Even a recent back and forth I had with Vivek Wadhwa on Twitter highlighted the problem of wanting to force entrance instead of building your own. He complained about the lack of “minorities” and women in Silicon Valley. My issue with this is the majority of African Americans are in the southeastern United States. Why would we not build our own Silicon Valley there? Again, we will get one in and call that progress, while the other nine are left in the cold. The energy to get that one in could be spent building an institution where all ten get in – one that we control and own not just there for “diversity”.

If we would have a honest moment with ourselves, we would note that we have become more educated and more dependent upon other groups. Asians and other immigrants who come to this country come to own businesses and assets and make it a point to do so whether they have education or not. Jewish Americans use to make it a point to start businesses to ensure their community had a place to work because they were discriminated against. Most likely taking their cue from African Americans coming out of slavery who built communities, hospitals, colleges, and other institutions to ensure there was a place for them. All of the things we have abandoned over the past sixty years to our own detriment. We keep crying foul, but it has been partly our own strategic behavior acting against our own interest the past sixty years and begging to have entrance into others institutions that have caused much self-inflicted harm. In the end, Washington and DuBois were both right, but just how their philosophies should have been applied was never considered to maximize benefit. We would do well to still consider the proper order and implementation of it even today.

Grambling Football Needs A Lifeline – Call Washington D.C. And Ask For Daniel Snyder

Anyone who has ever struggled with poverty knows how extremely expensive it is to be poor. – James Baldwin

If there is a heaven, then Eddie Robinson is somewhere up there raising hell. It goes without saying that since the late great coach’s passing, the most historic program in black college football has seen itself take an unexplainable and precipitous decline over the past decade. A far cry from the expected restoration of the program to its pinnacle after Doug Williams took over in 1998 and proceeded to win three consecutive SWAC championships for the university. The future looked promising and then the wheels began to fall off after Williams returned to the NFL for a stint as a personnel executive. An attempted second tour of duty was too little and too late. Looking forward though the question is how can the program be restored. My solution – call Daniel Snyder.

155931926

Let us face facts, when Grambling State University had the opportunity to leverage its winning ways to raise funds like many HBCUs have, it arguably simply did not strike enough of the iron while it was hot. Now, its cold – ice cold. Furthermore, at this point with HBCU public university alumni giving rates at five percent according to a recent article by HBCU Digest, help is certainly not coming at this point from alumni. The football program needs an infusion of millions and they needed it yesterday to get itself to proper standards that accompany a Division 1 program – not a middle school program. Players not having access to cool water during scorching practices in Louisiana heat, is a recipe for a player death and worse still a lawsuit. While it is hard to pinpoint Grambling’s actual university endowment, it is safe to say it is well under $10 million and that might be being generous. So why should Daniel Snyder come to the rescue or even care?

The Washington Redskins, valued at $1.7 billion are the third most valuable team in the NFL and the third most profitable NFL team with 2012 profits of almost $105 million. Their owner, Daniel Snyder, has an estimated net worth of $1.3 billion derived primarily from ownership of the Redskins, private equity, and a number of other enterprises. However, the team has been embroiled in a public relations that seems to never end over the team’s mascot name. Seen as offensive to many Native American groups whose primary ally tends to be African Americans, as it is often noted the only group who has suffered worse in America than African Americans are Native Americans. This often creates a great deal of sympathy for Native American causes among African Americans. Although the team technically plays its games in Maryland, do not be mistaken it is Washington D.C.’s team. A city whose population is 50 percent African American, home to two HBCUs, and two hours drive either way pushes that HBCU number swells to almost ten institutions. Beyond the geographical connection, the Washington Redskins connection to HBCUs runs directly into its own history with Doug Williams being not only an alum of Grambling State University, but the quarterback who led Washington to one of its most memorable Super Bowl victories becoming the first, and still only African American quarterback to do so.

dm_130128_nfl_doug_williams_more_than_a_game

To say it pains me that we must look outside of our community to resolve our needs is an understatement for anyone who knows me. However, this is a dire situation and it is calling for dire solutions. Daniel Snyder and the Washington Redskins could use some goodwill in the public as it deals with a growing agitation over the team name and a perceived view of European American owners lack of regard for minority sensitivity. It could use its relationship with Doug Williams connection to both the Washington Redskins and Grambling State University as a way to quell some of that angst. On Grambling’s part they need the public goodwill themselves and show some proactive behavior to resolve this sinking ship. If it means that the president and AD need to go hat in hand to Doug Williams to facilitate the meeting with Daniel Snyder, then pride be damned they need to do it.

HBCUs overall have done a poor job of conveying to their alumni bases just how costly and unprofitable athletic programs actually are. There is still too much confusion of just how much university money can actually be diverted into athletics at public universities which have major restrictions on such activity. It also begs a long-term question if HBCUs can not properly fund their athletic programs, then exactly what is the plan? These type of incidents leave a scar on not only the athletic programs but the universities themselves and HBCUs as a whole. Spelman’s approach was to disband its athletic program as a whole in favor of more wellness programs, which is certainly one approach. There is also the Ivy League approach where there are no athletic scholarships at all. Whatever the solution, Grambling State University needs to act quickly and make a major splash in its resolution before the ghost of Eddie Robinson returns, and if anyone remembers Coach Robinson in a bad mood – it will not be a pleasant hau – I mean return.

Should I Be A Housewife? A Social & Economic View

By Nadja Briscoe

first_lady_portrait_hires

Is Michelle Obama, a former lawyer and now first housewife of America, helping reintroduce and redefine the modern housewife?

There is a typical argument, usually postured by what I like to call ‘amateur feminists’ (and I count myself as one,) which follows: “With a brain like yours, why would you waste your talents cooking dinners and cleaning house?”

If by choosing to be a housewife, I were to become fixated on keeping a perfect household – think 1950s television – the argument would be compelling. However, staying home supposedly no longer means becoming a sheltered woman.

My colleagues and I have had numerous conversations on the role of women, both in society and the family. Is she forgoing her comparative advantage as the home’s primary care giver, nurturer, bearer of children, and first agent of socialization and instilling of values to the children, in order to have that for which we have fought and died – the right to have a corporate job and the right to be the career women? The right to CHOOSE!

Feminists are horrified at the very idea of a woman with an MBA making the choice to be the domestic supporter of her family – washing dishes and doing laundry – but, they also discount the fact that they can also be socially active bloggers, readers, entrepreneurs and rearers of socially aware children.

Is it possible to have it all? As housewives, can we continually exercise our minds as well as our domestic muscles? Can we prevent ourselves from any backsliding that could occur from ‘perfect household syndrome’?

Linda Hirshman, in her 2006 book “Get to Work … and Get a Life Before It’s Too Late,” disagrees vehemently. Linda Hirshman claims “the family — with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks — is a necessary part of life, but allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or the government.” This view point is easy to run away with, especially after watching my mom be the domestic supporter of a family of 8, do the same repetitive tasks for 20 years, as my father had a social life and was never home. As much as I adore and admire my mother, this is something I never wanted for my life; and, neither is it something that she wanted for me.

But, as we examine the economics of the two income family, the fact that women earn approximately 60-80 cents for every dollar a man earns, the inability to create wealth due to the financial cost of daycare, and the social cost of not having a constant supervisor at home when a child arrives from school, maybe we need to re-define what it means to be a housewife and the importance of that role.

The opportunities of today’s world offer an essential difference between the housewife of today and the housewife of our parents’ generation.  We now have easy access to contraception, which allows us to more effectively decide how many children we would like, and when to have them. We thaw most of our family’s meals, so there is no need to prepare the night before and spend hours cooking. Sewing is limited to replacing buttons. And, while we adore gossip in all forms, it is much less over picket fences, but rather over the Internet.

Neil Gilbert’s book, A Mother’s Work: How Feminism, The Market and Policy Shape Family Life, describes how women have responded to the contraceptive revolution, advances in civil rights, and the changing structure of the labor market since the 1960s. He notes that recently there has been a significant decline in childbearing, childrearing, and household production. The rate of childlessness has climbed to historic proportions for a period of relative peace and prosperity. Women are having fewer children; and, early childcare is being passed on to other women, as mothers shift their labor from the household to the marketplace. Feminists would say that women have finally been given the chance to do what they want, and rightly so. Others like myself would argue that it is out of economic necessity and desire to be independent of men, who have a history of using their financial power to oppress women, that drives women to the market place. However, Gilbert argues, and I am sure my colleague William would agree, that women are moving to the marketplace for three reasons: 1) the culture of capitalism undervalues the economic worth of childrearing activities and domestic production, 2) prevailing feminist expectations overestimate the social and emotional benefits of labor-force participation, and 3) that the family friendly policies of the welfare state create incentives that reinforce the norms and values of capitalism and feminism. So, as my dear friend William would say, despite societies needs and predilection, when women have to decide how much to invest in childrearing and paid employment, the majority of women chose to invest their time and energy in the latter despite the lack of economic and social sense to do so.

As a result, instead of critically evaluating important questions such as: Does having children make economic sense? Is sexual division of labor a rational choice? How has the time devoted to childcare by employed and non-employed mothers changed overtime? What are the educational and social outcomes of children in homes with non-employed mothers vs employed mothers? There is an emotional response to avoid these questions out of fear that the answers might result in retracting to traditional ways, which would deny the progress women have made over the past couple of decades.

The financial and social cost that society is paying, as women try to redefine their role in society, is typical of every stage of progress and evolution, which eventually runs into its own inherent limitations, creates a type of turmoil, even chaos, and causes the system either to break down (self-dissolution), or escape chaos by evolving to a higher degree of order (self-transcendence). This new and higher order escapes the limitations of its predecessor, but then introduces its own limitations and problems. As a result, old problems are solved or defused – in this case women are no longer as oppressed, and are given the right and the choice to engage in civic, political, and economic activities, but comes at the price of introducing new and more complex difficulties such as higher divorce rates, dysfunctional families, and a negative birth rate, just to name a few. Despite these complicated and difficult problems however, it is perverse to take the problems of the present, compare them with the accomplishments of the past, and thus claim everything has gone downhill. I feel this is what my friend William often does; although, maybe no worse a tactic than the opposite of comparing the problems of the past with the accomplishments of the present and saying everything is for the better, which I may be guilty of.

I agree wholeheartedly with retrogressive romantics like William, who argue passionately, and at times convincingly, that we need to honor and acknowledge the many great accomplishments of past, and attempt to retain and incorporate as much of their wisdom and accomplishment. But I also argue that no mater the problems we have now, the fact of the matter is that the train, for better or worse, is in motion. And, driving while looking in the rear view mirror is likely to cause an even worse accident.

The fact of the matter is that for most women, though not all, the labor of motherhood is undervalued; and, the personal benefits of paid work are overestimated. We all fantasize about work that uses our creativity, is self-directed, happens during the hours we choose, and occurs in an attractively lit setting with fascinating people — you know, jobs like women have on TV. Oprah’s job!

But, in this reality, it is probably more realistic to be a housewife with a supportive husband, who encourages you to start a business or work from home.

So, with all this said, as I move closer to 30 while childless, well educated, and on the verge of having the career that I have always wanted and worked so hard for, what will I decide? Will fear of the known – my mothers depiction of a housewife with repetitive menial tasks, and allowing a husband to be my provider who might use this financial power to oppress me – prevent me from having the image that my white educated women portray of the housewife: the NPR-listening, car-pooling, yoga expert, avid volunteer, foundation director? To be honest, I really don’t know. But, even more important to me is the question: if I do decide to be the career women that I am on the verge of becoming, am I doing a disservice to my community?

Ms. Briscoe is a graduate of the University of West Indies with studies in International Relations and Management Studies. She also holds a dual MBA from Brandeis University in Social Policy & Management and Marketing. Her work has seen her spend time as a consultant for major hospitals in New England and now serves as a business development analyst for a multinational healthcare company.