I'd like to analyze your sense of outrage a bit more here.
You are apparently endorsing the idea that what's good for getting a job with IBM is good for the country (echoing what was said about GM) and you're actually in favor of molding the curriculum in this way.
Or are you saying that your Mafia is only just now starting to provide more options wherein a more technical / vocational kind of education is offered.
Didn't or don't your New York schools have a history of offering "shop" wherein metal working / welding and other such skills are encouraged?
Are we only now extending "shop" to include business machines? Or has have New York secondary schools given students access to business machines going back to the card punch days? Probably only a few of them if any, right?
One reason I'm asking is I'm somewhat surmising that IBM employees would, on the whole, by sympathetic to my decade-long campaign to get "dot notation" introduced as a part of the mathematics we use in STEM.
Growing up to be an IBM person is not the same as growing up to be a calculus teacher at Cal State and indeed, spending too much time on calculus to the neglect of other topics, could hold you back from climbing the corporate ladder.
I associate calculus with that more "liberal arts" ideal wherein you just need some generic adult numeracy skills that prove you have enough cylinders for such internal combustion. Calculus is used as a "horsepower test".
But then whether you actually use it or need it... is not a core issue. You've proved you have the mental discipline, and that's what they're looking for.
However, in a school that reverse engineers IBM's corporate culture, I'm guessing the emphasis on calculus might be a lot less, or at the very least will be taught differently, with more attention to coding.
Wayne's linear algebra book, with BASIC in the back (dense, uncommented) was on the right track, ahead of its time lets say. No one seriously inverts 5 x 5 matrices for a day job without aid of electronic computing, whether or not that someone wrote the code.
Better that they should at least be able to read it though, especially if working for IBM.