Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday November 30 2016, @07:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-does-watson-think dept.

The CEO of IBM wrote an open letter to Trump soon after the election. IBM had a long tradition of staying out of politics, but I don't see any way to interpret this letter that isn't some sort of endorsement of Trump's administration, partly because it barely alludes to the latest buzz-phrase "cognitive solutions in the cloud", At the optimistic end, maybe it's just saying IBM doesn't care as long as Trump lets the corporation make bigger profits, but at the pessimistic end it could be taken as a warning to IBM's employees and business partners to keep their mouths shut if they don't like the Donald.

Has your employer done anything along these lines? I'm guessing that Ginny Rometty's letter was emailed to all hands and posted on the intranet, as well as the public posting at https://www.ibm.com/blogs/policy/ibm-ceo-ginni-romettys-letter-u-s-president-elect/ for everyone. Can anyone inside IBM confirm? If you've gotten something along these lines from your employer, do you care to speculate about why? Or even say how it made you feel?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday November 30 2016, @05:24PM

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Wednesday November 30 2016, @05:24PM (#435010) Journal

    Backlash against greedy elites is what put Trump in the White House. Establishment Democrats have to understand that a platform to "save the world" can't have the addendum "for the elites only". And establishment Republicans? Where to begin? They're so desperate to have power at all costs, that they seem not to have considered if it was worth the damage caused by stoking anti-intellectualism, denial, and corruption, as well as racism, sexism, and Islamophobia.

    In 2000, I wondered how important it was that the president not be an idiot. If he was well served, he didn't need brains. Alas, W. was not well served. Cheney in particular routinely pushed extreme policies, then tried to hide in the shadows, as if the V. P. could, and let W. take the heat when they didn't work out so well. Anonymity, however thin, emboldens people to take unethical shortcuts and escape opposition to their bad ideas and thinking. Like the police officer wearing mirror shades, and the corporate veil that obscures the individuals behind corporate policy,

    Would you have voted for Bernie if he'd won the Democratic nomination?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 30 2016, @06:13PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 30 2016, @06:13PM (#435035)

    How is electing a greedy elitist backlash against greedy elites? You put a fox in charge of the hen house, don't be surprised when its ravaged and destroyed.

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday November 30 2016, @07:20PM

      by bob_super (1357) on Wednesday November 30 2016, @07:20PM (#435067)

      It would be nice if he turned out to be a Wheeler-style dingo, but given his cabinet appointments, it doesn't look headed that way.

      While he seems to care first and foremost about his business/family/self, I am holding on to some hope that he wants his name in the right pages of the history books, and will try to be a popular president.
      On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised to see his own party to jump on the first chance to impeach him, to get his extremist VP in the big chair. I think I need to call a bookie and put some money on that.