|
not a Dow Jones company
|
NEWS RELEASE
8/26/2026
link to .pdf
Technologist Suggests Meta Trial-Judge Review 97 Year-Old Letter as It Relates to the Damage Done by Social Media to Today's Children
Summary
A 1929 letter written by William Seabury, former General Council to the Motion Picture Industry, that preceded Hollywood's Voluntary 1934 Hays Code, to the Oregon Supreme Court, which spoke about the dangers of media content on children, is still relevant today and suggests the dire necessity for a similar code to protect our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, from today's social media platforms.
“There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children."
Nelson Mandela, May 1995
Santa Cruz, August 26, 2026: A California-based technologist would like to refer, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, to a 1929 letter that ”echoes today's dire situation, in regards to children and the negative effects of social media.”
This private letter from, William Seabury, author of the 1929 Book, Motion Picture Problems, The Cinema and The League of Nations, summarizes his findings and demonstrates his stance on the potentially dangerous effects of media on children. The letter is addressed to the Hon. Kenneth R. Mcintosh, at the Temple of Justice, Olympia, warning of the impact and resulting negative consequences of motion pictures, on the youth of America. And per the passage below, we have a parallel situation today:
Social Media and the Damage Done:
Technologist, Peter Mackeonis commented, ”My 40-year technology career started in the early PC days of 1984 as the marketing director of MetaComCo, the software language company I co-founded with friends, and as a webite developer since 1994 I have watched social media exert a increasingly negative and influential force on the world's children, from toddlers to teens. It is generally accepted within the medical community that excessive social media use, among children, is linked to higher rates of anxiety, depression, poor sleep quality and negative body image. Spending more than three hours a day on-line doubles the risk of mental health issues, compounded by cyberbullying and a constant fear of missing out on what their peers are doing (FOMO). As parents' smart phones and social media platforms attempt 'age-restriction' technology, they seem incapable of controlling damaging content, so we maybe we need to look at the other end of the telescope and impose a stricter code of publishing ethics on these platforms.”
Members' Freedom of Expression:
While no doubt imposing restrictions on social media platforms will be seen, by many, as over- regulation and interfering with freedom of speech, the argument for such action is justified by the platforms themselves, as while they continue to say they are doing everything they can to remedy the situation, it has been stated by many former tech employees that instead of getting serious about this issue, their focus continues to be on making their sites more 'sticky.'
Section 20 Protection:
The argument that social media is being protected against prosecution by Section 20 of Communications Decency Act is negated by their employing algorithms that disregard the safety of the methods, for their shareholder's benefit, so, if the platforms will not change their attitudes and have the home-grown AI tools at their disposal, then their attitudes have to be changed for them.
Past Solution: The Hays Code 1934-1978
In 1931, the Motion Picture Industry, influenced by the letter of, William Seabury, was forward thinking, or sufficiently logical, which seems completely absent in today's 'stewards,' to understand the need of a voluntarily introduced, 'Hays Code,' for production standards.
In Closing:
As, Nelson Mandela, stated when he launched the 'Children's Fund' in South Africa, in May 1995, “There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats its children."
# # #
Email: comments to Peter@Mackeonis, or text through WhatsApp on 1.831.840.3729.
|
|
SANTA CRUZ, CA LUXURY BLOCK 'TRADED' TO SEPARATE THE CLASSES BY THE BAY
The super luxury block skirted the affordable housing rules to keep it 'premium.'
| Anton Pacific |
Pacific Station North |
 |
 |
|
7 story
Height: 85 feet
Area: 423,628 sq.ft.
Housing units: 207
(below market rate units 0*)
|
7 story
Height: 88 feet
Area: 136,111 sq. ft.
Housing units: 128
(below market rate units 128 (100%))
|
|
Ground floor retail: 11,000 sq. ft.
|
Ground floor retail: 6139 sq. ft.
|
Anton Pacific:
The developers of the 400,000+ sq.ft. Anton Pacific on Front Street, Santa Cruz built a luxury block of condominiums with top-end condos renting for $7,500 a month. They were given a pass to the state's affordable housing mandate in exchange for 'donating an undisclosed amount of land' to extend the 136,000+ sq.ft Pacific Station North development which is 100% affordable housing.
Amenities:
"Public records and local planning documents for the Anton Pacific development in downtown Santa Cruz do not specify an exact acreage or square footage for the land dedicated to the city. Rather than a specific land measurement, the developers and financiers (Anton DevCo and CrossHarbor Capital Partners ) ownership of the former Pacific Metro station properties involved dedicating/transferring those assembled parcels directly to the City of Santa Cruz. This land transfer served as an in-lieu fee contribution for affordable housing to clear the way for the city and the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District to build the consolidated Pacific Station North and South transit and affordable housing projects"
-------------
Anton Pacific Ownwrship
(100% owner)
CrossHarbor Capital Partners is a prominent real estate private equity firm based in Boston, Massachusetts. Founded in 1993 by Samuel T. Byrne and William H. Kremer, the firm manages institutional capital and invests exclusively in commercial real estate across the United States.
Core Investment Strategies
Capital Placement: Functions as a direct buyer, joint-venture equity partner, or lender providing debt.
Asset Targets: Invests in value-add and opportunistic properties, targeting distressed or underperforming real estate.
Housing Types: Funds multifamily apartments, workforce housing, student housing, and senior living facilities
Business Scale & Operations
Assets Under Management: Oversees over $10 billion in real estate assets.
Track Record: Executed more than 380 transactions totaling over $34 billion in value.
Investor Base: Manages funds for university endowments, public pension funds, and sovereign entities.
Office Locations: Operates out of its Boston headquarters with investment offices in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.
Pacific Station North Ownership (non city)
(percentages of ownership are not public knowlwdgew)
Pacific Station North in downtown Santa Cruz is a public-private partnership developed by Eden Housing and For the Future Housing, Inc.. The underlying land parcels are owned by the City of Santa Cruz and the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (METRO), which also integrates the new downtown transit hub. The residential and affordable housing components upon completion are operated and managed as affordable housing by Eden Housing.
(1)Eden Housing Investors
(primary developer and investor)
Eden Housing partners with institutional lenders, banks, and corporate investors—such as Bank of America, Chase, and Citibank—to finance affordable housing developments through Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and public-private funding across California.
Investment & Funding Structure: Tax Credits: Relies heavily on federal and state Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC).
Key Financial Partners: Collaborates with major institutions like Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Bank, and regional groups like Housing Trust Silicon Valley.
Capital Sources: Blends private equity investors with public subsidies from CalHFA, CCRC, and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)
(2)For the Future Housing, Inc
For the Future Housing, Inc. partners with major financial institutions, public agencies, and non-profits to develop affordable mixed-use and multi-family real estate projects. Their institutional and project-level partners typically include entities like Eden Housing alongside regional and state housing departments.
Key Project Partners & Funders Development Collaborators: Mission-driven non-profits like Eden Housing.
Financial & Public Backers: State housing departments, local municipal bodies, and banking partners (such as US Bank and Berkadia) providing Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTCs) and sustainability grants.
Community Stakeholders: Local health and service providers integrated into their mixed-use ground floors
# # #
|
|
How Santa Cruz, California, Progressive Politics Created The Housing Shortage
and is now destroying the city by permitting luxury condos.
Before Now
In 1979 the Santa Cruz city passed Measure O to cap housing growth at 1.4% and in 1981 a firmly progressive majority took control of the council and their policies further prioritized slow growth and neighborhood preservation
However no such cap was imposed on UCSC which between 1979 and 2025 increased its enrollment by some 14,400 while the general population growth only increased by some 6,400.
A housing shortage was born and in 2024 Sacramento, as part of a state-wide home building program, ordered the city of Santa Cruz to build 3,736 new units
Although UCSC is building a 3,000+ bed development on its campus, in response to the 2024 housing mandate the council is overbuilding the city with disproportionally large and expensive high-rise investment-grade studio apartments and condominiums that not only are financially out of the reach of locals but that, if and when occupied, will strain the city's resources and utilities and cause more traffic congestion. And if that is not bad enough these will do nothing to solve the city's housing problem.
# # #
NOTES:
1) The city's political shift from conservative to progressive:
In 1979, the election of progressive activists Mike Rotkin and Bruce Van Allen to the Conservative-leaning Santa Cruz City Council set the stage for a political shift. A progressive majority was secured in 1981 when additional left-leaning members joined the council, launching a long era of local progressive governance. Activists shifted focus to local elections with Mike Rotkin and Bruce Van Allen winning seats and they joined liberal member Bert Muhly to focus on greenbelts and rent control.
2) City Growth Cap (measure O)
in 1979, similar to the county, the city imposed a strict annual growth cap of roughly 1.4% on new city housing construction
In 1981 Two more progressive activists won election and the conservative-leaning majority was eliminated when two more progressive activists won election. Mardi Wormhoudt and John Laird joined the council. and a firm progressive majority took control and policies prioritized slow growth and neighborhood preservation.
3) A cap on new housing while the city's population grew
In 1979, the population of the city was approximately 41,000
In 1985, the population of the city was approximately 45,000 increase of 4,000
in 1995, the population of the city was approximately 51,900 increase of 6,900
In 2005, the population of the city was approximately 54,550 increase of 2,600
In 2015, the population of the city was approximately 63,800 increase of 9,250
In 2025, the population of the city was approximately 61,797 Decrease of 2,003
In 1979 - 2025 the population (including UCSC) Increases of 20,797
4) UCSC growth took it's toll on housing:
In 1979 UCSC enrollment 5,900
In 2025 UCSC enrollment 20,140 increase of 14,400
5) In 2025 Sacramento Orders California Cities to build more homes:
In September 2024 Newsom signed key reform bills—AB 1893 and AB 1886— which went into effect on January 1, 2025, to codify, clarify, and strengthen the rule to force cities to build more homes.
UCSC steps up
UCSC has broken ground on a 3,000+ bed development on its campus, (A lawsuit from advocacy group Habitat and Watershed Caretakers had stalled the project)
The city is conned by developers
For the 2023–2031 state housing planning cycle (RHNA), the City of Santa Cruz was allocated a target of 3,736 new housing units, while unincorporated Santa Cruz County was assigned 4,634 units. Local reports and civil grand jury findings indicate that regional building has fallen significantly behind these mandates, leaving the area thousands of units short of its state-defined goals and affordable housing needs
# # #
|
click on image to see small print
|
The Truth About Wildfires: The Human Element
A closer look should to be taken at wildfires that are media-linked to global warming as an estimated 80% to 95% of global wildfires are ignited by human activities rather than natural causes like lightning according to the World Health Organization .
1: Common Human Causes
Debris and agricultural burning:
Clearing land or burning trash
Power lines:
Downed or arcing electrical infrastructure.
Campfires:
Unattended or poorly extinguished recreational fires.
Equipment and vehicles:
Sparks from machinery, trains, or dragging chains.
Negligence and arson:
Discarded cigarettes and intentional acts.
(source Nationkl Park Service)
2: Regional Breakdown of Wildfires
United States: About 84% of wildfires are human-caused.
Mediterranean Europe: More than 90% to 95% are human-caused.
Tropics and Africa: Roughly 75% to 90% stem from human activities, heavily tied to agricultural land clearing
(source NASA Science)
3: Notable California Fires And Their Causes:
1) The current (8/2026) Washington State fire that has destroyed 600 homes.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/spokane-washington-wildfires-homes-destroyed/
Cause: Arson
2) The 2025 Palisades Fire destroyed 6,831 structures and damaged another 973 in the Pacific Palisades and Malibu areas. In the city of Malibu alone, the mayor confirmed that nearly 600 single-family homes were among the structures destroyed. https://laedc.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/LAEDC_2025-LA-Wildfires-Study_090525-UPDATE.pdf
Cause : Arson
3) The 2025 Eaton Fire, which swept through Altadena and surrounding areas destroyed a total of 6,011 homes. An additional 100 multi-family residential structures were also completely lost to the fire: Total structures destroyed: 9,418. https://www.kcra.com/article/southern-california-edison-equipment-2025-eaton-fire-cause-los-angeles-county/73346640
Cause: SoCal Edison Power lines
4) The 2018 Camp Fire in Paradise, California destroyed about 11,000 to 14,000 homes, with a total of roughly 18,700 destroyed structures overall. Total area burned: 153,336 acres. https://www.britannica.com/event/Camp-Fire-of-2018
Cause: PG& Power lines
4: US Wildfire Arson Facts
Percentage range: Intentionally set fires account for roughly 6% to 10% of all recorded wildfires in California, and up to 10% to 15% in specific yearly data reviews.
Total yearly counts: For example, Cal Fire reported 358 arson-caused wildland fires during the 2022 tracking period.
Arrests made: State fire law enforcement agencies typically make between 70 and 120 arson arrests each year depending on the severity of the fire season.
Broader context: While lightning and accidental human actions (like power lines or campfires) start a larger total volume of massive acreage fires, arson remains a steady criminal risk (New York Times)
# # #
Comments to editor@theStreetWallJournal.com
|
|
|
Why Was London For Sale?
Chinese CCP and Arab Stakeholders in London
|
Chinese investment in London developments includes billions poured into commercial real estate, major regeneration sites, and corporate infrastructure. Notable mainland and Hong Kong investments include the £1.3 billion acquisition of the Walkie Talkie building and Greenland Group’s $2 billion commitment to sites like the Ram Brewery.
ont-weight: 400; border-bottom-color: rgb(10,10,10); margin: 0px">Arab nations—primarily Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have invested tens of billions of pounds into London's real estate and development market. Foreign government money via Gulf sovereign funds makes up nearly 44% of international real estate investment in the capital
|
|
The Middle Eastern Projects in London are also Chinese CCP linked
The "massive Arab development Thameside West, a massive £2.5 billion ($3.34 billion) waterfront regeneration project in East London's Royal Docks. The project is spearheaded by Arada, a prominent UAE-based real estate developer backed by Gulf royalty, which acquired an 80% stake in the 47-acre site
Arada, the UAE-based master developer, is primarily owned by KBW Investments (60%)—chaired by Prince Khaled bin Alwaleed bin Talal—and Basma Group (40%), owned by Sheikh Sultan bin Ahmed Al Qasimi
Arada does not have reported Chinese equity investors, but it does partner heavily with Chinese state-owned enterprises for major construction projects. The Sharjah-based developer is backed by Gulf royals, including HRH Prince Khaled bin Alwaleed, who chairs its newly launched global funds management platform, Arada Capital.
If you are looking at Arada's Chinese business ties, consider:
Construction Contracts: Arada has awarded over AED2.7 billion in main building contracts to China Tiesiju Civil Engineering Group, a subsidiary of the state-owned China Railway Group.
Flagship Projects: These contractors are building a large portion of the Aljada megaproject in Sharjah and the ultra-luxury Armani Beach Residences on Dubai's Palm Jumeirah
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of Many Middle Eastern Owned Projects in London
Middle Eastern investment, particularly from UAE and Saudi developers, has seen a major surge along the Thames. For example, Aldar (an Abu Dhabi-based developer) owns London Square, which is developing prime residential real estate on the Thames dockside near Battersea
Aldar investments from Apollo Management and Apollo Global Management has Chinese investors, primarily through its Global Wealth Management division and regional institutional clients. However, due to heightened geopolitical tensions, Apollo's approach to raising capital in the region has shifted heavily toward high-net-worth private wealth and away from mainland government entities.
Where Apollo's Chinese Capital Comes From Greater China Wealth Management: Apollo actively raises money from wealthy individuals, family offices, and private banks across mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. It maintains a dedicated Greater China Global Wealth Management team to feed capital into its private credit and yield-focused funds.
Regional Institutional Clients: The firm utilizes a Greater China Institutional Group based out of Singapore to secure capital from regional Asian insurance companies and retirement funds looking for global market exposure
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Chinese Stage Development a Case of "All's Well That Ends Well" But Perhaps Not for Londoners
China Vanke was a primary equity investor and joint venture partner in The Stage, a £750 million mixed-use redevelopment project in Shoreditch, London.
The Chinese real estate giant acquired a 21% stake in the consortium in November 2015. This move marked Vanke's official debut into the United Kingdom and European property markets.
Strategic and Financial Details
The Investment: Vanke invested over £30 million to purchase its stake from existing equity holders.
The Consortium: Vanke entered the joint venture alongside Cain International (formerly Cain Hoy), McCourt Global, Galliard Homes, and Investec Structured Property Finance.
Operational Setup: To manage this and future UK interests, Vanke established Vanke UK and appointed a former UBS executive, Lily Lin, as its UK managing director.
Value Contribution: Beyond capital, Vanke provided additional development expertise, international connections, and cross-border marketing access to global buyers
The office space at The Stage development in Shoreditch, London is fully let, but the retail and residential sectors are not completely filled. According to the master developer Cain International, the leasing and sales status is split across the different sectors of the mixed-use site:
Office Space: 100% Fully Leased. The premium commercial office buildings (The Hewett and The Bard) are completely occupied, driven by strong demand for experience-led workspaces from major tenants like WeWork and Equinox.
Retail & Leisure: Leasing is currently underway. The developer is actively curating a distinct mix of boutique brands, cafés, and restaurants to populate the central public piazza and restored Victorian viaducts.
Residential Apartments: Nearly sold out but units remain. The 37-storey landmark tower features 412 luxury homes. While the majority are occupied, select apartments and final upper-floor duplex penthouses remain available for immediate purchase or tenancy.
Culture: The landmark site also incorporates the upcoming Museum of Shakespeare, a permanent immersive visitor center built directly over the excavated remains of the 16th-century Curtain Playhouse
# # #
|
| |
| |
|
|
'NO PAYMENT' HOME EQUITY LOANS
THIS PREDATORY 'HARD TIMES' PRODUCT IS AN EQUITY-RETURN BASED MORTGAGE
that will probably strip millions of homeowners of their properties.
A case of "We take ours at the back end - and we give it to you in the rear end"
The lender's 'share of your home's equity' calculation is based on the amount borrowed as a percentage of your home's value. The lenderI will appraise your property at below its value to adjust the loan's equity percentage - and then the equity is doubled. So you would be selling your equity at under 50% on the dollar. THEN over a 10 year period and regardless of whether the property appreciates OR depreciates the sum due grows on average between 10% -19.99% a year so whatever - and the lender can force a sale if you cannot pay back the loan.
BELOW IS HOW THIS PREDATORY LENDING WORKS
EG. A 10-YEAR HOME EQUITY AGREEMENT
|
Example
The lender advancing $50,000 against a property worth $600,000 represents a 8.3% equity stake in the property
BUT
The lender's appraiser values your property at $500,000
SO
Tthe percentage of equity given up increases to 10%
AND
the loan contract doubles the equity stake as a buffer
And
Closing costs reduce the money you receive to $45,000
SO
The lender now owns a 20% equity stake of a $600,000 property for $50,000
In one year
If you are forced by econimic reasons to sell the property
and it sells for $569,251
And
The lender will receive $65,995 for their $50,000 loan
and you would receive $503,256
In 10 Years the loan has to be repaid
Now the property is worth $775,829
And
The lender has a 20%
If you sell
The lender reveives $141,060 for $45,000
a profit of $96,060
And
If you have no other mortages,
you would receive $634,769
IF you do not wish to sell
You will have to pay the lender $141,060
SO, Why is this a bad deal for the home owner?
Because IN YEAR 10 The lender has to be paid back
and can force a sale OF YOUR PROPERTY unless you pay them back
And
Mortgage rates are currently 7%,
and a profit of $91,060 is equal to an interest rate of 11%
QED
|
# # #
|
The 'Social Score' Project
"Individualism is the only political system that works"
Ayn Rand
|
THERE IS A REASON who so many data centers are being built and it may not be as benign, as we have all become vulnerable to absolute control through a pending Social Score system.
It is thought by many that the ultimate purpose of the personal computer would only become realized by the launch of the internet and the functions of email, texting, shopping and above all social media. And that purpose, that we all continue to slow walk into, is data collection and the creation of a Social Score system.
The extent and type of information collected, as below, is thorough to the point where, once linked by the massive data centers currently being constructed, governments (and some corporations) will have the potential to freeze-at-will the life of Americans.
We should all remember the authoritarian COVID restrictions that were effectively imposed for the safety of the community. Now imagine an AI-based real-time monitoring system that freezes your credit cards, bank account and vehicle, or guides an electric vehicle to a police station because it decided that you were anti-social.
As a FICO score governs borrowing power, a social score would govern you.
Write to your congressman to stop AI being used to track the American People
|
| |
CURRENT DATA EXPOSURE FOR MOST AMERICANS
|
|
I HAVE YOUR
birthday
birth place
address
opinions
voice
texts
finger prints
photographs
email address
I CAN
have you fired
stop you driving
turn you vehicle off
turn your water off
turn your power off
close your bank a/c
block your passport
stop you fromflying
cancel your credit
and more
|
|
I KNOW YOUR
passport number
social security number
driving license number
bank account number
credit card numbers
shopping habits
place of work
choice of food
favorite restaurants
I KNOW WHAT
you drive
you collect
you wear
movies you watch
TV you watch
music you like
clubs you join
sites you visit
your friends say & do
and more
|
| |
|
|
SOME CURRENT GLOBAL DATA COLLECTION SYSTEMS
Current Global Population: 8.3 billion
| |
|
|
D |
A |
T |
A |
- |
P |
O |
I |
N |
T |
S |
| Since |
Collector |
User Base |
Location |
Email SMS |
Phone |
Contacts |
Height etc |
Images |
Purchases |
Video |
Bio-metrics |
Finances |
Personality |
| 1993 |
Internet |
6+ billion
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
| 1998 |
GOOGLE |
4+ billion |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
| 2004 |
Facebook |
3+ billion |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
| 2007 |
Smart phones |
6.5 billion |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
| 2008 |
Tesla |
8.5 million |
X |
|
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
| 2020 |
COVID Data |
Unknown |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
X |
| 2026 |
AI |
6.5 billion |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
# # #
A Consumers' Guide to How the Federal Reserve Affects Credit Card Interest Payments
How many Americans know that the Federal Reserve is owned by the banks and NOT a government agency?
Established on December 23, 1913, by President Woodrow Wilson through the Federal Reserve Act , the Federal Reserve System (the Fed) was created as the U.S. central bank to ensure financial stability following the Panic of 1907. It serves as a decentralized system with 12 regional banks and a central Board of Governors, designed to create an "elastic" currency and regulate the banking system.
Below is a Current Example of How the Federal Reserve Might Act
AS A REACTION TO the current Iran conflict - at a time of great hardship for the American people - the Federal Reserve is contemplating raising interest rates to slow down inflation. But the rise in inflation will be due to increases in the price of basics. such gasoline for all forms of transport and food that can't be controlled,
So the American people will be paying more so let's look at how the credit card banks would benefit
CREDIT CARD INTEREST
Payments by consumers:
Statistic 1: Cardholders pay annual interest of $159 Billion
111 million American credit card holders carry forward a monthly balance of $6.500 at an adjustable rate of 22%, each paying some $1,430 a year in interest or a total of $159 Billion
Statistic 2: A 25% rate increase would increase each cardholder fees by $3.58
When the Federal Reserve raises of lower interest rates by 25 basis points (that's .25% to most people) the impact on the majority of credit card holders in pretty minimal with average adjustment going up of down approximately $3.58.
Income to card issuers / banks
:
Statistic 3: Banks currently net $132 Billion in excess interest (over the FederalFund rate)
The current Federal Funds rate is 3.75% and on a card with an interest rate of 22% the margin is approximately 18.25% or $132 Billion (111.000.000 x $6,5000 x .1825)
Statistic 4: A 25% rate increase would net the banks a further $397
The annual cumulative impact on the credit card companies when the Federal Reserve card companies raises or lowers the interest rate by .25% is $397 million (111,000,000 x $3.58)
Statistic 5: A .5% rate increase would net the banks a further $795 million
The annual cumulative impact on the credit card companies when the Federal Reserve card companies raises or lowers the interest rate by .5% is $795 million (111,000,000 x $7.16)
SO, LET'S LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN
The key Federal Reserve member banks (Shareholders) are:
JPMorgan Chase Bank, Citibank, Bank of America
The major credit card issuers companies.
Major credit card companies that, work with the four primary card networks
—Visa, Mastercard, American Express, and Discover are led by :
Chase, Citicorp, Bank of America.
|
