In September 2025, global inflation rates and central bank interest rates showed significant variation across major economies. Most economies initiated interest rate cuts from mid-2024 due to declining inflationary pressures. The U.S., UK, and EU central banks followed a consistent pattern of regular rate reductions throughout late 2024. In September 2025, Russia maintained the highest interest rate at 17 percent, while Japan retained the lowest at 0.5 percent. Varied inflation rates across major economies The inflation landscape varies considerably among major economies. China had the lowest inflation rate at -0.3 percent in September 2025. In contrast, Russia maintained a high inflation rate of 8 percent. These figures align with broader trends observed in early 2025, where China had the lowest inflation rate among major developed and emerging economies, while Russia's rate remained the highest. Central bank responses and economic indicators Central banks globally implemented aggressive rate hikes throughout 2022-23 to combat inflation. The European Central Bank exemplified this trend, raising rates from 0 percent in January 2022 to 4.5 percent by September 2023. A coordinated shift among major central banks began in mid-2024, with the ECB, Bank of England, and Federal Reserve initiating rate cuts, with forecasts suggesting further cuts through 2025 and 2026.

This Economic Commentary provides an overview of several frictions and the channels through which they affect economic welfare under elevated trend inflation above 2 percent. These frictions, associated with financial transactions, price and wage stickiness, and cognitive limitations, suggest that inflation imposes significant costs on society. Higher inflation may lead to a steeper Phillips curve, a situation which increases the volatility of inflation and interest rates.

The inflation rate in the United States declined significantly between June 2022 and September 2025, despite rising inflationary pressures towards the end of 2024. The peak inflation rate was recorded in June 2022, at *** percent. In August 2023, the Federal Reserve's interest rate hit its highest level during the observed period, at **** percent, and remained unchanged until September 2024, when the Federal Reserve implemented its first rate cut since September 2021. By September 2025, the rate dropped to **** percent, signaling a shift in monetary policy. What is the Federal Reserve interest rate? The Federal Reserve interest rate, or the federal funds rate, is the rate at which banks and credit unions lend to and borrow from each other. It is one of the Federal Reserve's key tools for maintaining strong employment rates, stable prices, and reasonable interest rates. The rate is determined by the Federal Reserve and adjusted eight times a year, though it can be changed through emergency meetings during times of crisis. The Fed doesn't directly control the interest rate but sets a target rate. It then uses open market operations to influence rates toward this target. Ways of measuring inflation Inflation is typically measured using several methods, with the most common being the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI tracks the price of a fixed basket of goods and services over time, providing a measure of the price changes consumers face. At the end of 2023, the CPI in the United States was ****** percent, up from ****** a year earlier. A more business-focused measure is the producer price index (PPI), which represents the costs of firms.

The enduring discourse regarding the effectiveness of interest rate policy in mitigating inflation within developing economies is characterized by the interplay of structural and supply-side determinants. Moreover, extant academic literature fails to resolve the direction of causality between inflation and interest rates. Nevertheless, the prevalent adoption of interest rate-based monetary policies in numerous developing economies raises a fundamental inquiry: What motivates central banks in these nations to consistently espouse this strategy? To address this inquiry, our study leverages wavelet transformation to dissect interest rate and inflation data across a spectrum of frequency scales. This innovative methodology paves the way for a meticulous exploration of the intricate causal interplay between these pivotal macroeconomic variables for twenty-two developing economies using monthly data from 1992 to 2022. Traditional literature on causality tends to focus on short- and long-run timescales, yet our study posits that numerous uncharted time and frequency scales exist between these extremes. These intermediate scales may wield substantial influence over the causal relationship and its direction. Our research thus extends the boundaries of existing causality literature and presents fresh insights into the complexities of monetary policy in developing economies. Traditional wisdom suggests that central banks should raise interest rates to combat inflation. However, our study uncovers a contrasting reality in developing economies. It demonstrates a positive causal link between the policy rate and inflation, where an increase in the central bank’s interest rates leads to an upsurge in price levels. Paradoxically, in response to escalating prices, the central bank continues to heighten the policy rate, thereby perpetuating this cyclical pattern. Given this observed positive causal relationship in developing economies, central banks must explore structural and supply-side factors to break this cycle and regain control over inflation.

Context

The Federal Reserve sets interest rates to promote conditions that achieve the mandate set by the Congress — high employment, low and stable inflation, sustainable economic growth, and moderate long-term interest rates. Interest rates set by the Fed directly influence the cost of borrowing money. Lower interest rates encourage more people to obtain a mortgage for a new home or to borrow money for an automobile or for home improvement. Lower rates encourage businesses to borrow funds to invest in expansion such as purchasing new equipment, updating plants, or hiring more workers. Higher interest rates restrain such borrowing by consumers and businesses.

Content

This dataset includes data on the economic conditions in the United States on a monthly basis since 1954. The federal funds rate is the interest rate at which depository institutions trade federal funds (balances held at Federal Reserve Banks) with each other overnight. The rate that the borrowing institution pays to the lending institution is determined between the two banks; the weighted average rate for all of these types of negotiations is called the effective federal funds rate. The effective federal funds rate is determined by the market but is influenced by the Federal Reserve through open market operations to reach the federal funds rate target. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meets eight times a year to determine the federal funds target rate; the target rate transitioned to a target range with an upper and lower limit in December 2008. The real gross domestic product is calculated as the seasonally adjusted quarterly rate of change in the gross domestic product based on chained 2009 dollars. The unemployment rate represents the number of unemployed as a seasonally adjusted percentage of the labor force. The inflation rate reflects the monthly change in the Consumer Price Index of products excluding food and energy.

Acknowledgements

The interest rate data was published by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis' economic data portal. The gross domestic product data was provided by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis; the unemployment and consumer price index data was provided by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Inspiration

How does economic growth, unemployment, and inflation impact the Federal Reserve's interest rates decisions? How has the interest rate policy changed over time? Can you predict the Federal Reserve's next decision? Will the target range set in March 2017 be increased, decreased, or remain the same?

August 2024 marked a significant shift in the UK's monetary policy, as it saw the first reduction in the official bank base interest rate since August 2023. This change came after a period of consistent rate hikes that began in late 2021. In a bid to minimize the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bank of England cut the official bank base rate in March 2020 to a record low of *** percent. This historic low came just one week after the Bank of England cut rates from **** percent to **** percent in a bid to prevent mass job cuts in the United Kingdom. It remained at *** percent until December 2021 and was increased to one percent in May 2022 and to **** percent in October 2022. After that, the bank rate increased almost on a monthly basis, reaching **** percent in August 2023. It wasn't until August 2024 that the first rate decrease since the previous year occurred, signaling a potential shift in monetary policy. Why do central banks adjust interest rates? Central banks, including the Bank of England, adjust interest rates to manage economic stability and control inflation. Their strategies involve a delicate balance between two main approaches. When central banks raise interest rates, their goal is to cool down an overheated economy. Higher rates curb excessive spending and borrowing, which helps to prevent runaway inflation. This approach is typically used when the economy is growing too quickly or when inflation is rising above desired levels. Conversely, when central banks lower interest rates, they aim to encourage borrowing and investment. This strategy is employed to stimulate economic growth during periods of slowdown or recession. Lower rates make it cheaper for businesses and individuals to borrow money, which can lead to increased spending and investment. This dual approach allows central banks to maintain a balance between promoting growth and controlling inflation, ensuring long-term economic stability. Additionally, adjusting interest rates can influence currency values, impacting international trade and investment flows, further underscoring their critical role in a nation's economic health. Recent interest rate trends Between 2021 and 2025, most advanced and emerging economies experienced a period of regular interest rate hikes. This trend was driven by several factors, including persistent supply chain disruptions, high energy prices, and robust demand pressures. These elements combined to create significant inflationary trends, prompting central banks to raise rates to temper spending and borrowing. However, in 2024, a shift began to occur in global monetary policy. The European Central Bank (ECB) was among the first major central banks to reverse this trend by cutting interest rates. This move signaled a change in approach aimed at addressing growing economic slowdowns and supporting growth.

The Volcker Shock was a period of historically high interest rates precipitated by Federal Reserve Chairperson Paul Volcker's decision to raise the central bank's key interest rate, the Fed funds effective rate, during the first three years of his term. Volcker was appointed chairperson of the Fed in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter, as replacement for William Miller, who Carter had made his treasury secretary. Volcker was one of the most hawkish (supportive of tighter monetary policy to stem inflation) members of the Federal Reserve's committee, and quickly set about changing the course of monetary policy in the U.S. in order to quell inflation. The Volcker Shock is remembered for bringing an end to over a decade of high inflation in the United States, prompting a deep recession and high unemployment, and for spurring on debt defaults among developing countries in Latin America who had borrowed in U.S. dollars.

Monetary tightening and the recessions of the early '80s

Beginning in October 1979, Volcker's Fed tightened monetary policy by raising interest rates. This decision had the effect of depressing demand and slowing down the U.S. economy, as credit became more expensive for households and businesses. The Fed funds rate, the key overnight rate at which banks lend their excess reserves to each other, rose as high as 17.6 percent in early 1980. The rate was allowed to fall back below 10 percent following this first peak, however, due to worries that inflation was not falling fast enough, a second cycle of monetary tightening was embarked upon starting in August of 1980. The rate would reach its all-time peak in June of 1981, at 19.1 percent. The second recession sparked by these hikes was far deeper than the 1980 recession, with unemployment peaking at 10.8 percent in December 1980, the highest level since The Great Depression. This recession would drive inflation to a low point during Volcker's terms of 2.5 percent in August 1983.

The legacy of the Volcker Shock

By the end of Volcker's terms as Fed Chair, inflation was at a manageable rate of around four percent, while unemployment had fallen under six percent, as the economy grew and business confidence returned. While supporters of Volcker's actions point to these numbers as proof of the efficacy of his actions, critics have claimed that there were less harmful ways that inflation could have been brought under control. The recessions of the early 1980s are cited as accelerating deindustrialization in the U.S., as manufacturing jobs lost in 'rust belt' states such as Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania never returned during the years of recovery. The Volcker Shock was also a driving factor behind the Latin American debt crises of the 1980s, as governments in the region defaulted on debts which they had incurred in U.S. dollars. Debates about the validity of using interest rate hikes to get inflation under control have recently re-emerged due to the inflationary pressures facing the U.S. following the Coronavirus pandemic and the Federal Reserve's subsequent decision to embark on a course of monetary tightening.

The interest rate set by the Federal Reserve is a crucial tool for promoting economic conditions that meet the mandate established by the United States Congress, which includes high employment, low and stable inflation, sustainable economic growth, and the moderation of long-term interest rates. The interest rates determined by the Fed directly influence the cost of credit, making financing either more accessible or more restrictive. When interest rates are low, there is a greater incentive for consumers to purchase homes through mortgages, finance automobiles, or undertake home renovations. Additionally, businesses are encouraged to invest in expanding their operations, whether by purchasing new equipment, modernizing facilities, or hiring more workers. Conversely, higher interest rates tend to curb such activity, discouraging borrowing and slowing economic expansion.

The dataset analyzed contains information on the economic conditions in the United States on a monthly basis since 1954, including the federal funds rate, which represents the percentage at which financial institutions trade reserves held at the Federal Reserve with each other in the interbank market overnight. This rate is determined by the market but is directly influenced by the Federal Reserve through open market operations to reach the established target. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meets eight times a year to determine the federal funds rate target, which has been defined within a range with upper and lower limits since December 2008.

Furthermore, real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is calculated based on the seasonally adjusted quarterly rate of change in the economy, using chained 2009 dollars as a reference. The unemployment rate represents the seasonally adjusted percentage of the labor force that is unemployed. Meanwhile, the inflation rate is determined by the monthly change in the Consumer Price Index, excluding food and energy prices for a more stable analysis of core inflation.

The interest rate data was sourced from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis' economic data portal, while GDP information was provided by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, and unemployment and inflation data were made available by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The analysis of this data helps to understand how economic growth, the unemployment rate, and inflation influence the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy decisions. Additionally, it allows for a study of the evolution of interest rate policies over time and raises the question of how predictable the Fed’s future decisions may be. Based on observed trends, it is possible to speculate whether the target range set in March 2017 will be maintained, lowered, or increased, considering the prevailing economic context and the challenges faced in conducting U.S. monetary policy.

The benchmark interest rate in the United States was last recorded at 4 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - United States Fed Funds Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

Source is Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/"NAME OF MEASURE" Column names are "Name of Measure" from FRED's catalog.

Group 1: Yield Curve Indicators These focus on the shape of the Treasury yield curve, comparing longer-term to shorter-term rates. They are primarily used to: Signal Economic Expectations: A normal curve (longer-term rates higher) suggests expectations of growth and possibly inflation. A flattening or inverted curve (short-term rates near or above long-term) could signal a potential slowdown or recession.

Group 2: Monetary Policy and Market Expectations These spreads look at the difference between Treasury yields and the Federal Funds Rate, the primary tool of monetary policy. They indicate: Market vs. Fed Outlook: Widening spreads could suggest the market expects faster rate hikes or higher long-term inflation than the Fed is signaling. Narrowing spreads could mean the opposite. Risk-Taking: When these spreads widen, it can be a sign of investors moving from safe Treasuries to riskier assets in search of yield.

Group 3: Credit Risk and Market Sentiment These spreads focus on corporate bond yields relative to Treasuries, highlighting the added compensation investors require for holding riskier corporate debt. They signal: Credit Conditions: Widening spreads suggest deteriorating credit conditions or lower risk tolerance among investors. Narrowing spreads suggest the opposite. Economic Confidence: Investors often demand higher premiums for corporate bonds during economic uncertainty, widening these spreads.

Group 4: Breakeven Inflation Rates The breakeven inflation rate represents a measure of expected inflation derived from 30-Year Treasury Constant Maturity Securities (BC_30YEAR) and 30-Year Treasury Inflation-Indexed Constant Maturity Securities (TC_30YEAR). The latest value implies what market participants expect inflation to be in the next 30 years, on average.

We study how the co-movement of inflation and economic activity affects real interest rates and the likelihood of debt crises. First, we show that for advanced economies, periods with procyclical inflation are associated with lower real interest rates. Procyclical inflation implies that nominal bonds pay out more in bad times, making them a good hedge against aggregate risk. However, such procyclicality also increases sovereign default risk when the economy deteriorates, since the government needs to make larger (real) payments. In order to evaluate both effects, we develop a model of sovereign default on domestic nominal debt with exogenous inflation risk and domestic risk-averse lenders. Countercyclical inflation is a substitute with default, while procyclical inflation is a complement with it, by increasing default incentives. In good times, when default is unlikely, procyclical inflation yields lower real rates. In bad times, as default becomes more material, procyclical inflation can magnify default risk and trigger an increase in real rates.

This is not going to be an article or Op-Ed about Michael Jordan. Since 2009 we've been in the longest bull-market in history, that's 11 years and counting. However a few metrics like the stock market P/E, the call to put ratio and of course the Shiller P/E suggest a great crash is coming in-between the levels of 1929 and the dot.com bubble. Mean reversion historically is inevitable and the Fed's printing money experiment could end in disaster for the stock market in late 2021 or 2022. You can read Jeremy Grantham's Last Dance article here. You are likely well aware of Michael Burry's predicament as well. It's easier for you just to skim through two related videos on this topic of a stock market crash. Michael Burry's Warning see this YouTube. Jeremy Grantham's Warning See this YouTube. Typically when there is a major event in the world, there is a crash and then a bear market and a recovery that takes many many months. In March, 2020 that's not what we saw since the Fed did some astonishing things that means a liquidity sloth and the risk of a major inflation event. The pandemic represented the quickest decline of at least 30% in the history of the benchmark S&P 500, but the recovery was not correlated to anything but Fed intervention. Since the pandemic clearly isn't disappearing and many sectors such as travel, business travel, tourism and supply chain disruptions appear significantly disrupted - the so-called economic recovery isn't so great. And there's this little problem at the heart of global capitalism today, the stock market just keeps going up. Crashes and corrections typically occur frequently in a normal market. But the Fed liquidity and irresponsible printing of money is creating a scenario where normal behavior isn't occurring on the markets. According to data provided by market analytics firm Yardeni Research, the benchmark index has undergone 38 declines of at least 10% since the beginning of 1950. Since March, 2020 we've barely seen a down month. September, 2020 was flat-ish. The S&P 500 has more than doubled since those lows. Look at the angle of the curve: The S&P 500 was 735 at the low in 2009, so in this bull market alone it has gone up 6x in valuation. That's not a normal cycle and it could mean we are due for an epic correction. I have to agree with the analysts who claim that the long, long bull market since 2009 has finally matured into a fully-fledged epic bubble. There is a complacency, buy-the dip frenzy and general meme environment to what BigTech can do in such an environment. The weight of Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook, Nvidia and Tesla together in the S&P and Nasdaq is approach a ridiculous weighting. When these stocks are seen both as growth, value and companies with unbeatable moats the entire dynamics of the stock market begin to break down. Check out FANG during the pandemic. BigTech is Seen as Bullet-Proof me valuations and a hysterical speculative behavior leads to even higher highs, even as 2020 offered many younger people an on-ramp into investing for the first time. Some analysts at JP Morgan are even saying that until retail investors stop charging into stocks, markets probably don’t have too much to worry about. Hedge funds with payment for order flows can predict exactly how these retail investors are behaving and monetize them. PFOF might even have to be banned by the SEC. The risk-on market theoretically just keeps going up until the Fed raises interest rates, which could be in 2023! For some context, we're more than 1.4 years removed from the bear-market bottom of the coronavirus crash and haven't had even a 5% correction in nine months. This is the most over-priced the market has likely ever been. At the night of the dot-com bubble the S&P 500 was only 1,400. Today it is 4,500, not so many years after. Clearly something is not quite right if you look at history and the P/E ratios. A market pumped with liquidity produces higher earnings with historically low interest rates, it's an environment where dangerous things can occur. In late 1997, as the S&P 500 passed its previous 1929 peak of 21x earnings, that seemed like a lot, but nothing compared to today. For some context, the S&P 500 Shiller P/E closed last week at 38.58, which is nearly a two-decade high. It's also well over double the average Shiller P/E of 16.84, dating back 151 years. So the stock market is likely around 2x over-valued. Try to think rationally about what this means for valuations today and your favorite stock prices, what should they be in historical terms? The S&P 500 is up 31% in the past year. It will likely hit 5,000 before a correction given the amount of added liquidity to the system and the QE the Fed is using that's like a huge abuse of MMT, or Modern Monetary Theory. This has also lent to bubbles in the housing market, crypto and even commodities like Gold with long-term global GDP meeting many headwinds in the years ahead due to a demographic shift of an ageing population and significant technological automation. So if you think that stocks or equities or ETFs are the best place to put your money in 2022, you might want to think again. The crash of the OTC and small-cap market since February 2021 has been quite an indication of what a correction looks like. According to the Motley Fool what happens after major downturns in the market historically speaking? In each of the previous four instances that the S&P 500's Shiller P/E shot above and sustained 30, the index lost anywhere from 20% to 89% of its value. So what's what we too are due for, reversion to the mean will be realistically brutal after the Fed's hyper-extreme intervention has run its course. Of course what the Fed stimulus has really done is simply allowed the 1% to get a whole lot richer to the point of wealth inequality spiraling out of control in the decades ahead leading us likely to a dystopia in an unfair and unequal version of BigTech capitalism. This has also led to a trend of short squeeze to these tech stocks, as shown in recent years' data. Of course the Fed has to say that's its done all of these things for the people, employment numbers and the labor market. Women in the workplace have been set behind likely 15 years in social progress due to the pandemic and the Fed's response. While the 89% lost during the Great Depression would be virtually impossible today thanks to ongoing intervention from the Federal Reserve and Capitol Hill, a correction of 20% to 50% would be pretty fair and simply return the curve back to a normal trajectory as interest rates going back up eventually in the 2023 to 2025 period. It's very unlikely the market has taken Fed tapering into account (priced-in), since the euphoria of a can't miss market just keeps pushing the markets higher. But all good things must come to an end. Earlier this month, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics released inflation data from July. This report showed that the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers rose 5.2% over the past 12 months. While the Fed and economists promise us this inflation is temporary, others are not so certain. As you print so much money, the money you have is worth less and certain goods cost more. Wage gains in some industries cannot be taken back, they are permanent - in the service sector like restaurants, hospitality and travel that have been among the hardest hit. The pandemic has led to a paradigm shift in the future of work, and that too is not temporary. The Great Resignation means white collar jobs with be more WFM than ever before, with a new software revolution, different transport and energy behaviors and so forth. Climate change alone could slow down global GDP in the 21st century. How can inflation be temporary when so many trends don't appear to be temporary? Sure the price of lumber or used-cars could be temporary, but a global chip shortage is exasperating the automobile sector. The stock market isn't even behaving like it cares about anything other than the Fed, and its $billions of dollars of buying bonds each month. Some central banks will start to taper about December, 2021 (like the European). However Delta could further mutate into a variant that makes the first generation of vaccines less effective. Such a macro event could be enough to trigger the correction we've been speaking about. So stay safe, and keep your money safe. The Last Dance of the 2009 bull market could feel especially more painful because we've been spoiled for so long in the markets. We can barely remember what March, 2020 felt like. Some people sold their life savings simply due to scare tactics by the likes of Bill Ackman. His scare tactics on CNBC won him likely hundreds of millions as the stock market tanked. Hedge funds further gamed the Reddit and Gamestop movement, orchestrating them and leading the new retail investors into meme speculation and a whole bunch of other unsavory things like options trading at such scale we've never seen before. It's not just inflation and higher interest rates, it's how absurdly high valuations have become. Still correlation does not imply causation. Just because inflation has picked up, it doesn't guarantee that stocks will head lower. Nevertheless, weaker buying power associated with higher inflation can't be overlooked as a potential negative for the U.S. economy and equities. The current S&P500 10-year P/E Ratio is 38.7. This is 97% above the modern-era market average of 19.6, putting the current P/E 2.5 standard deviations above the modern-era average. This is just math, folks. History is saying the stock market is 2x its true value. So why and who would be full on the market or an asset class like crypto that is mostly speculative in nature to begin with? Study the following on a historical basis, and due your own due diligence as to the health of the markets: Debt-to-GDP ratio Call to put ratio

Graph and download economic data for 10-Year Real Interest Rate (REAINTRATREARAT10Y) from Jan 1982 to Oct 2025 about 10-year, interest rate, interest, real, rate, and USA.

We study how monetary policy communications associated with increasing the federal funds rate causally affect consumers' inflation expectations. In a large-scale, multi-wave randomized controlled trial (RCT), we find weak evidence on average that communicating policy changes lowers consumers' medium-term inflation expectations. However, information differs systematically across demographic groups, in terms of ex ante informedness about monetary policy and ex post compliance with the information treatment. Monetary policy communications have a much stronger effect on people who had not previously heard news about monetary policy and who take sufficient time to read the treatment, implying scope to increase the impact of communications by targeting specific groups of the general public. Our findings show that, in an inflationary environment, consumers expect that raising interest rates will lower inflation. More generally, our results emphasize the importance of measuring both respondents' information sets and their compliance with treatment when using RCTs in empirical macroeconomics, to better understand the well-documented evidence of heterogeneous treatment effects.

Economic welfare is essential in the modern economy since it directly reflects the standard of living, distribution of resources, and general social satisfaction, which influences individual and social well-being. This study aims to explore the relationship between national income accounting different attributes and the economic welfare in Pakistan. However, this study used data from 1950 to 2022, and data was downloaded from the World Bank data portal. Regression analysis is used to investigate the relationship between them and is very effective in measuring the relationship between endogenous and exogenous variables. Moreover, generalized methods of movement (GMM) are used as the robustness of the regression. Our results show that foreign direct investment outflow, Gross domestic product growth rate, GDP per capita, higher Interest, market capitalization, and population growth have a significant negative on the unemployment rate, indicating the rise in these factors leads to a decrease in the employment rate in Pakistan. Trade and savings have a significant positive impact on the unemployment rate, indicating the rise in these factors leads to an increase in the unemployment rate for various reasons. Moreover, all the factors of national income accounting have a significant positive relationship with life expectancy, indicating that an increase in these factors leads to an increase in economic welfare and life expectancy due to better health facilities, many resources, and correct economic policies. However, foreign direct investment, inflation rate, lending interest rate, and population growth have significant positive effects on age dependency, indicating these factors increase the age dependency. Moreover, GDP growth and GDP per capita negatively impact age dependency. Similarly, all the national income accounting factors have a significant negative relationship with legal rights that leads to decreased legal rights. Moreover, due to better health facilities and health planning, there is a negative significant relationship between national income accounting attributes and motility rate among children. Our study advocated the implications for the policymakers and the government to make policies for the welfare and increase the social factors.

The Federal Reserve has raised the federal funds rate by 500 basis points since March 2022. But how tight is the current policy stance? We account for the federal funds rate, inflation expectations, and the natural rate of interest and find that monetary policy has only been restrictive since 2023:Q1. We find that to bring inflation down to 2 percent, the Federal Reserve may have to keep the federal funds rate in restrictive territory for some time.

The benchmark interest rate in Japan was last recorded at 0.50 percent. This dataset provides - Japan Interest Rate - actual values, historical data, forecast, chart, statistics, economic calendar and news.

The benchmark interest rate in Russia was last recorded at 16.50 percent. This dataset provides the latest reported value for - Russia Interest Rate - plus previous releases, historical high and low, short-term forecast and long-term prediction, economic calendar, survey consensus and news.

Iran’s inflation rate rose sharply to 34.79 percent in 2019 and was projected to rise another 14 percentage points before slowly starting to decline. Given the recent sanctions by the United States regarding the nuclear deal, this number has both political and economic implications. Political implications President Hassan Rouhani won the 2017 election based on economic promises, many stemming from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. Lifting these sanctions opened the Iranian economy to many opportunities, including the chance to benefit from increased oil exports. The JCPOA was an integral part of the Rouhani campaign, so any economic hardship that is linked to the deal will likely be blamed on the president. Economic implications High inflation leads to high interest rates, which leads to less borrowing. Less borrowing means less investment, which slows economic growth. This slower growth often leads to higher inflation, which is what economists call an inflationary spiral. As such, Iran will have difficulty achieving substantial GDP growth until inflation returns to manageable rates.

50 years+ of historical inflaction, interest and unemployment rates by country

data source: https://data.worldbank.org cover image credit: https://www.pexels.com/photo/one-dollar-bill-3943739/