GM Creating 10,000 New IT Jobs

Good news — Government General Motors announced plans yesterday to hire 10,000 additional IT workers over the next several years, far out-pacing it’s closest competitors.

The nation’s biggest automaker is moving past layoffs and the Motor City’s rusty, low-tech image in a bold and expensive move to develop software and invent the most advanced gizmos for your car, rather than buy software and other electronic applications from outside companies. Experts say it’s also the start of a trend as manufacturers realize that software is among the few things that will set them apart from competitors. […]

General Motors Co. isn’t alone in trying to move more technology development under its roof. But the plans of its biggest competitor, Ford Motor Co., aren’t nearly as ambitious.

GM’s aims to bring 90 percent of its computer technology work into the company by recruiting workers to four new information technology centers around the nation.

The consequences of doing so may have fewer implications, but rescuing the American auto industry may prove to be as big of a part of the president’s legacy as healthcare reform will.

No thanks to Mitt Romney, who said we should Let Detroit Go Bankrupt.

IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.

This man has no business being in the White House.

According to the nonprofit Center for Automotive Research, the American auto-industry is expected to add 167,000 jobs by 2015.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Economy and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • JRQuest

    Mitt Romney said “In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check”
    Hardly what the author of this ‘I love King Obama’ story implies.

    • mrbrink

      Theoretical nonsense. Spoken from atop Mt. Nowhere.

    • muselet

      The whole of Mitt Romney’s op-ed was gibbering nonsense. Had the government not provided aid to the car industry, GM and Chrysler would long since have had their bones picked over by Japanese, Korean, Chinese and European companies, and Ford would have been teetering on the brink of failure because of supply disruptions and rising component prices.

      Romney’s prescription would have been a disaster for the industry and for the economy as a whole. He has no business being in the White House.

      –alopecia

      • mrbrink

        Everyone knows that the future of American manufacturing is in credit default swaps!

    • Brutlyhonest

      “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” is indeed the title of Rmoney’s op-ed and that quote IS the opening paragraph. His prediction was absolutely wrong.

      You’re quote is the closing paragraph of the op-ed. Strangely, managed bankruptcy is exactly what the “bailout” was, but in another case of fnc-induced cognitive dissonance you ignore the fact that no one but the USG would secure the loans while you run in circles screaming “GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER! AHHHH! ”

      Even more humorous is your projection: BushCo often referred to “ruling” the Country vice governing it.

  • bphoon

    If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye.

    Mitt: Ford asked for–and got–no “bailout”. The government purchased equity in GM and Chrysler under certain conditions. This amounted to managed bankruptcies which, by the way, you endorsed. The difference, Mitt, is that you advocated allowing these companies to undergo managed bankruptcies in the private market. Problem: they’d already tried to find private entities to engage in this and nobody–nobody–was willing to go along. So,the government was the last resort. When the CEO’s of GM and Chrysler said they wouldn’t last the weekend without government intervention, they meant it. Had they gone under, that giant sucking sound you would have heard would have been up to 3 million families going under with them–families who rely on the multitude of suppliers and shippers and other purveyors of support infrastructure that, in turn, depend on GM and Chrysler for much of their business.

    Keep in mind, also, that other auto companies who weren’t similarly distressed, such as the American branches of Honda, Nissan, VW and Mercedes-Benz rely on the same network of support infrastructure. Had those support companies gone under these other automotive companies might well have become distressed, too.

    The ripple effect of that kind of manufacturing failure would have been gigantic and very long-lasting. However, we now have both GM and Chrysler as well as Ford turning in the best financial performance they’ve had in nearly a generation. They’ve added jobs and are set to add thousands more in the coming years.

    So, please tell me again which outcome was best for the country?