IBM pledges $150 billion to boost U.S. tech growth, computer manufacturing
International Business Machines Corporation on Monday announced it will invest $150 billion in the U.S. over the next five years, including more than $30 billion to advance American manufacturing of its mainframe and quantum computers.
'We have been focused on American jobs and manufacturing since our founding 114 years ago, and with this investment and manufacturing commitment we are ensuring that IBM remains the epicenter of the world's most advanced computing and AI capabilities,' IBM CEO Arvind Krishna said in a release.
The company's announcement comes weeks after President Donald Trump unveiled a far-reaching and aggressive 'reciprocal' tariff policy to boost manufacturing in the U.S. As of late April, Trump has exempted chips, as well as smartphones, computers, and other tech devices and components, from the tariffs.
IBM said its investment will help accelerate America's role as a global leader in computing and fuel the economy. The company said it operates the 'world's largest fleet of quantum computer systems,' and will continue to build and assemble them in the U.S., according to the release.
IBM competitor Nvidia, the chipmaker that has been the primary benefactor of the artificial intelligence boom, announced a similar push earlier this month to produce its NVIDIA AI supercomputers entirely in the U.S.
Nvidia plans to produce up to $500 billion of AI infrastructure in the U.S. via its manufacturing partnerships over the next four years.
Last week, IBM reported better-than-expected first-quarter results. The company said it generated $14.54 billion in revenue for the period, above the $14.4 billion expected by analysts. IBM's net income narrowed to $1.06 billion, or $1.12 per share, from $1.61 billion, or $1.72 per share, in the same quarter a year ago.
IBM's infrastructure division, which includes mainframe computers, posted $2.89 billion in revenue for the quarter, beating expectations of $2.76 billion.
The company announced a new z17 AI mainframe earlier this month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
16 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Wall Street titan slams Trump's mega-bill
Billionaire Ken Griffin has sided with Elon Musk in his attack on Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'. The Citadel CEO warned the act will 'add several trillion dollars' to the national debt, which will soon surpass $37 trillion. Unlike Musk, who called the bill a ' disgusting abomination,' Griffin criticized the legislation in more conciliatory terms. 'The bill will unquestionably add several trillion dollars,' Griffin said Thursday at the 2025 Forbes Iconoclast Summit in New York City. 'The challenge with the legislation is there's not enough tough decisions... around how we're going to put our fiscal house in order.' Griffin made his concerns known about runaway government spending after the Congressional Budget Office estimated the GOP budget bill would add $2.4 trillion to the deficit over the next 10 years. Much of this comes down to the bill's extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, which will decrease the revenue coming into the government. Griffin, who voted for Trump in the 2024 election, did not say he disagreed with the extension of the prior tax cuts. But he did take issue with even more tax relief for businesses. 'The continued reduction in tax rates for small and medium enterprise businesses; I'm not sure what we're going to achieve with that,' said Griffin, who is estimated to have a net worth of $44.5 billion. Griffin cast the bill, which is still winding its way through the Senate, as poorly thought out and dangerous to the nation's finances. 'You cannot run deficits of 6 or 7 percent [higher than GDP] at full employment after years of growth. That's just fiscally irresponsible,' said Griffin, who is worth $44.5 billion. 'There are a lot of question marks in the bill as to why we're continuing to increase our tax cuts when we have a fiscal deficit of this magnitude,' he added. approached Griffin's team and the White House for comment. Griffin also warned that if America's leaders fail to reign in spending, they risk a total collapse of US bond markets. Last week, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon sounded a similar alarm , predicting that at some point, investors will lose confidence in the US government's ability to service its debt. 'US default prices are probably the same as Italy or Greece,' Griffin said in reference to credit default swap markets where investors can bet on countries failing to meet their debt obligations. The consequences of a default - i.e. the country running out of money to pay its bills - would be 'catastrophic' for the US and the global economy, former Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has said. The stock market would almost certainly crash in such a scenario, with investors around the world coming to the understanding that the US - thought to be the most stable government in the world - could not fulfill its financial obligations for the first time in its nearly 250 years of existence. Back in April, when Trump unveiled and quickly paused his wide scale Liberation Day tariffs, multiple reports suggested that his U-turn was prompted by the major sell off in US bonds. Trump appeared to acknowledge this market turmoil at the time, saying: 'People were getting a little bit yippy, a little bit out of line.' Griffin didn't limit his criticisms of the administration to uncertainty on US debt or the big beautiful bill, which Trump wants passed by the Fourth of July. He also slammed the president for his ongoing trade policy, largely governed by historically-high tariffs. He said the tariffs have 'really taken their toll already on our economy' and have called 'into question American exceptionalism.' His firm Citadel has already cut its estimate for US economic growth by about half since Trump took office in January. As a parting shot at the president, Griffin decried Trump's decision to tear into Walmart CEO Doug McMillon for warning customers that the big-box retailer may have to increase prices thanks to tariffs. 'Walmart should STOP trying to blame Tariffs as the reason for raising prices throughout the chain. Walmart made BILLIONS OF DOLLARS last year, far more than expected. Between Walmart and China they should, as is said, 'EAT THE TARIFFS,' and not charge valued customers ANYTHING, Trump posted to Truth Social in May.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Naked City: The fightback of Edinburgh's Westside Centre
This wee al fresco aroma emporium greets you at the entrance to Wester Hailes' Westside shopping plaza. I've seen a lot worse in gateways to an urban shopping centre across the UK. The Westside, formerly known as the Plaza has attained semi-legendary status in the day-to-day lives of the local citizenry. It was opened in 1974 at a time when these retail malls were beginning to appear across the UK, driven by how seductively they appeared in American television shows. Within a decade though, some of them slipped into a state of decrepitude, often characterised by anti-social behaviour public drunkenness and drug-taking. They were where you went if you were dodging school or attempting some casual shop-lifting. This one in Wester Hailes suffered more than most, not helped by retailers upping sticks at the first hint of economic decline. The wider Wester Hailes community meanwhile had become fixed in the public eye as an exemplar of social deprivation throughout the 1980s and locals began to avoid the Plaza as the dealers and jaikies moved in. It forced the old Scottish Office to intervene in 1990 with the establishment of the Wester Hailes Partnership to address urban decay. It included £17m investment in the shopping centre and its change of name to the Westside Plaza. And then, in a bizarre legal dispute, one of Scotland's most senior judges intervened to force a major supermarket to stay in the Wester Hailes shopping centre. Safeway had wanted to pull out of the Plaza but Lord Penrose blocked the move. It seems that this was the 'anchor' retailer whose presence had enticed other retailers to invest in the centre. The landlords of the property had sought an injunction to prevent Safeway from walking away, knowing that it would start a domino effect. Since then its fortunes have ebbed and flowed. It's recently been placed under new management and had another name change to the Westside Centre, 'Plaza' perhaps having become one of those words now forever trapped in the 1990s like 'bling' and 'chillax'. Read more in the series: New ownership has come with a cash injection of around £4m and regrettably, the inclusion of the word 're-imagined' which really ought to be banned, along with 'hub'. Indeed this errant pair of inelegant locutions appear on the first page of the website which tells the locals about their 'community hub re-imagined'. You've got to admire the enthusiasm. I'd been advised not to raise my expectations but if I'm being honest, this is a fine retail emporium, and far better than others I've inspected throughout Britain. Westside Plaza shopping centre (Image: GordonTerris) Okay, so there are several units and outlets which seem always to be a feature of malls in edgy conurbations. Here we have your Wow Desserts sitting beside Farm Foods. Why are there always dessert emporium in places like this? I don't want to cast any aspersions on the business model, but few of them remain extant for long, so you can draw your own conclusions. The British Heart Foundation is handily placed adjacent to it, though. Providing some stalwart reassurance though, is Gregg's, the kenspeckle and ubiquitous taste of no-nonsense Cooncil cuisine and none too terrible at that. So it would be rude not to grab a wee steak bake, so I do. And there's your mobile phone shop and your pawnbrokers. And there's a proper Deli here too called Daisy's selling good artisan gear that would stiff you for double the price if it were on Byres Road or Morningside. And at a ladies' 'House of Wax' table of unguents and applications (I know not for what) I hear an outbreak of authentic, working class Edinburgh cadences. A lady is complaining to the security guard about some heavy-handedness by the police in her street the previous day. 'Making a 'fuckan nuisance eh themselves, eh?' There are hard 'a's and hard 'u's where I expect simple Glaswegian I's to be. Two elderly gents called John and Noel are having a 'hing', arms folded over the top-floor balustrade. 'I'm originally from Ireland,' says John, but I've been here more than 40 years and couldn't imagine being anywhere else.' He's pleased with how the Westside looks now. 'It's had its challenges, but it's looking smart and clean now. I like Wester Hailes, there's a good community spirit and I think it's fighting back.' The single most depressing feature about this tidy two-storey shopping complex is the half dozen or so empty retail units. When you see them in working class neighbourhoods you rage at the insouciant iniquity of casual capitalism and the inability of local authorities to stop them. Read more: The Bank of Scotland abandoned this place last month. In neighbourhoods like this the banks never hang around once they sense not much more money is to be made. It's as though, having squeezed every last penny out of hard-pressed communities: their high-interest loans, their mortgages then these people have no more value. No matter that elderly people might still need them and God forbid they might be asked to extend some leeway when the jobs disappear and the energy bills soar. I meet Georgina from nearby Longstone and her friend who very politely and firmly that 'ladies like me shouldn't be giving their names to strange men like you.' I like her. A lot. I tell Georgina that her pal's right, and that on no account should she be talking to any journalists ... other than those from The Herald because we're founded on respect and good manners and we know our place. They both like the West Side too and suggest it's improved greatly in the last few years. I feel bound to re-visit Gregg's to source something light for my lunch. There are healthy-looking wraps with chicken arrangements from the Mediterranean and the Far East, which I've never seen in any of their west coast outlets. It's not quite alfalfa crepes and skinny decaffs, but their presence is noted even if they remain unconsumed. Kevin also toured Wester Hailes High School meeting head teacher David Young (Image: GordonTerris) There are cafes, a couple of outfitters and of course a handful of male and female personal grooming shops. There's a tendency to dismiss their presence as indicators of something fleeting and insubstantial. In places where there's not much money though, it becomes even more important to look your best and feel good about it. It's about self-respect and caring for yourself. Kevin McKenna is a Herald writer and columnist and is Scottish Feature Writer of the Year. This year is his 40th in newspapers.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump-Musk feud shows what happens when unregulated money floods politics
Elon Musk said, very loudly and very publicly, what is usually the quiet part of the role of money in US politics. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate. Such ingratitude,' he wrote on his X social media platform amid an ongoing feud with Donald Trump. When rightwing commentator Laura Loomer wrote that Republicans on Capitol Hill had been discussing whom to side with in the inter-party feud, Musk replied with a nod toward the long tail of his influence. 'Oh and some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years … ,' Musk wrote on X. Billionaires in the US often seek to influence politics in big and small ways, throwing their money and influence around to extract what they want from the government. But few are as explicit and influential as Musk has proven in the past year – and it's showing just how transactional and broken US governance has become. The Trump-Musk battle exemplifies the post-Citizens United picture of US politics: the world's richest person paid handsomely to elect his favored candidate, then took a formal, if temporary, role with a new governmental initiative created for him that focused on dismantling parts of the government he didn't like. We're sitting ringside to a fight between the mega-rich president and the far richer Republican donor to see who can cut more services from the poor. As one satirical website put it: 'Aw! These Billionaires Are Fighting Over How Much Money to Steal From Poor People.' Fifteen years ago, the US supreme court ruled that corporations and outside groups could spend as much as they wanted on elections. In that ruling, conservative justice Anthony Kennedy said: 'The appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.' In the years since, it's become clear that these infusions of wealth have eroded democracy, with Musk's ostentatious example accelerating an already out-of-control level of money in politics. Musk spent nearly $300m to elect Trump in 2024. It's the billionaire's government now. 'Fifteen years after that decision, we're seeing the full culmination of living under a Citizens United world – where it's not just elections that are for sale, but it's that our entire government, and the apparatus of our government, is up for sale,' Tiffany Muller, the president of End Citizens United, told the Bulwark earlier this year. Musk isn't alone here: in races up and down the ballot, ultra-rich donors are throwing around their cash to get their favored candidates elected. This is the standard state of play for politics in the US now, in both political parties. Bernie Sanders confronted Democrats at their convention last year to say: 'Billionaires in both parties should not be able to buy elections, including primary elections.' Earlier this year, Musk poured big money into a Wisconsin judicial election, but lost to the Democratic candidate. And he's sent small-dollar donations to Republicans who wanted to go after judges who ruled against the Trump administration. The threat of his money, even if it is uneven and has an inconsistent success record, looms large for both political parties. But, by virtue of his unelected role, Musk couldn't do as much as he wanted to stop Trump's signature spending bill – or so it seems so far. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' didn't cut enough spending or favor Musk enough or otherwise meet his litmus test for a budget. And when the administration stopped working for him, he turned on it, blazing out the door in a chaotic fashion. It's a fitting coda to the uneasy alliance between Trump and Musk that started with a warm embrace and front-row status for the ultra-wealthy when Trump took office. The fact that Musk holds such sway over the budget process is in itself corruption. Trump has said Musk knew what was in the bill, the undertone being that the administration sought his approval before the public explosion. Musk embraced a brawling style of political spending that is rare among the uber-wealthy, who tend to let their money speak louder than their public words. One expert in philanthropy previously told the Guardian Musk stood out because of his 'complete eschewal of discretion as a mode of political engagement'. Musk is now rallying his followers on X to reach out to their members of Congress and kill the bill, a quest that could be successful, depending on how Republican lawmakers shake out when they're forced to decide between their ideologue president and a megadonor known for his vindictiveness. In rightwing media, the feud has created a chasm. On Breitbart, one commentator noted how Trump was 'sticking his finger in the eye of his biggest donor and that never happens'. In the American Spectator, one writer opined that Musk did not elect Trump: 'the American people did.' But in the pages of the Washington Examiner, Musk's stance on the bill was praised because Trump's budget plan 'deserves to die'. 'I don't mind Elon turning against me, but he should have done so months ago,' Trump wrote to cap off a series of posts and public comments about Musk. Musk has 'lost his mind', the president said in a TV interview Friday. So far, Republican officials are lining up behind Trump. 'President Trump has done more than any person in my lifetime to earn the trust of the movement he leads,' JD Vance said. If Musk ultimately loses, he could take his money and run elsewhere. He floated the idea of creating a third political party, a prospect that's been tried many times before but without the wealth infusion and bully pulpit he'd offer to the cause. Democrats, themselves quite reliant on rich donors, will lobby for him to switch sides. The Democratic representative Ro Khanna suggested the party should 'be in a dialogue' with Musk. Although Khanna, who represents Silicon Valley and has called for the left to embrace economic populism, saw intense backlash against his comments from his party, he doubled down. 'If Biden had a big supporter criticize him, Trump would have hugged him the next day,' he wrote on X. 'When we refused to meet with @RobertKennedyJr, Trump embraced him & won. We can be the party of sanctimonious lectures, or the party of FDR that knows how to win & build a progressive majority.'
