eMacromall.com - The Informative Mall

▷ Labor Market & Politics

Economics may wear a lab coat, but behind the equations and charts, it's tangled in the messy, thrilling world of politics and ideology. When the neoclassical school rebranded "political economy" to the more clinical-sounding "economics" in the early 20th century, it wasn't just tidying up semantics—it was a power move. Their mission? To elevate economics into the realm of pure science, scrubbed clean of ethical debates and value judgments. But that ambition reveals a paradox: stripping politics out of economics is itself a deeply political act. Every tidy model, every assumption about "rational behavior" or "efficient markets," carries a worldview embedded in it. So while spreadsheets and supply curves suggest neutrality, the discipline remains a battleground of ideas about fairness, power, and human priorities—making it far more philosophical than it likes to admit.
Most of the world's poorest people don't live in poor countries. In fact, over 70% of those surviving on less than $1.25 a day—the international poverty line—are in middle-income nations like China and India. Back in the mid-2000s, China had about 170 million people (13% of its population), and India a staggering 450 million (42%), living in absolute poverty. These numbers reveal the deep disparities that can coexist with booming economies. Both countries have made tremendous progress—India lifted over 400 million people out of poverty between 2005 and 2021, while China saw tens of millions exit hardship in just a few years. The challenge now is ensuring that growth doesn't just look good on paper but transforms lives at every level.
As of 2025, Japan and Germany are prime examples of how aging populations can reshape economies and societies. Both countries have low fertility rates (around 1.4 children per woman) and high life expectancies, leading to shrinking workforces and rising dependency ratios. In Japan, over 29% of the population is aged 65 or older, creating a severe labor crunch. Many companies are hiring workers over 70, and the government has raised the retirement age to 65 to keep older citizens in the workforce. The shortage is especially acute in sectors like healthcare and construction, and Japan is increasingly turning to foreign workers to fill the gaps. Germany faces similar demographic pressures, with a declining population and growing demand for elderly care. While it has maintained steady economic growth, the burden on its social security and healthcare systems is intensifying. Germany has also leaned on immigration to offset workforce declines, though challenges remain. Both nations offer valuable lessons in adapting to demographic shifts—whether through policy reform, workforce innovation, or rethinking retirement.
As of 2025, the richest 1% of the global population controls approximately 43.4% of the world's total wealth, amounting to over $54 trillion in assets. This includes everything from real estate and stocks to bonds and business investments. Meanwhile, nearly 44% of humanity lives below the poverty line of $6.85 per day, highlighting a vast and growing economic divide. This concentration of wealth isn't just a statistic—it's reshaping global society, challenging economic stability, and fueling debates about equity, taxation, and systemic reform.
Unlike the original Nobel Prizes, which sprang from Alfred Nobel's will and focused on science, literature, and peace, the economics award was a latecomer—crafted in 1968 by Sweden's central bank to celebrate its 300th anniversary. Officially dubbed the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, it has always carried a touch of controversy. Some members of the Nobel family have openly criticized the prize, arguing that their ancestor would've bristled at honoring free-market economists whose views run counter to his more humanitarian ideals. So while the prize is cloaked in Nobel prestige, its roots are more political than poetic—marking it as a curious hybrid of economics, legacy branding, and ideological friction.
The world produces more than enough food to nourish every person on the planet, yet millions still go hungry—not because of scarcity, but because of how unevenly food is shared. Vast harvests often stall behind broken infrastructure, economic inequality, and systems that prioritize profit over people. Crops meant to feed humans are funneled into livestock, prices push nutrition out of reach, and conflict or climate chaos cripple supply chains. Even waste plays a villain's role—perfectly edible food tossed aside while others starve. Solving global hunger isn't about growing more; it's about reimagining distribution, access, and values so that abundance becomes a right, not a privilege.
The U.S. stock market just endured its worst week in months, rattled by a combination of weak labor data and President Trump's sweeping new tariffs, which reignited fears of a slowing economy and potential recession. The Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 542 points on August 1, 2025, while the S&P 500 dropped 1.6% and the Nasdaq fell 2.24%, capping off a brutal start to August. Investors were shaken by the July jobs report showing only 73,000 new jobs, alongside massive downward revisions to May and June figures, which now show a combined gain of just 33,000 jobs instead of the previously reported 291,000. Compounding the anxiety, Trump's latest round of tariffs—ranging from 10% to 41% on imports from 92 countries—sent shockwaves through global markets, with Canada now facing a 35% levy, up from 25%. Tech giants like Amazon, Nvidia, and Apple led the sell-off, and bond yields fell as investors fled to safer assets. Analysts now place the odds of a Federal Reserve rate cut in September at 86%, as policymakers scramble to stabilize markets and counteract the economic drag from trade tensions and weakening job growth.
The July 2025 jobs report from the U.S. Labor Department delivered a sobering update on the state of the labor market, revealing that the economy added just 73,000 jobs, well below the 105,000 forecast by economists. The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.2% from 4.1%, and more troubling were the massive downward revisions to previous months: May's job gains were slashed from 144,000 to just 19,000, and June's from 147,000 to a mere 14,000, erasing 258,000 jobs from earlier estimates. These revisions suggest the labor market has been far weaker than previously believed, with average monthly job growth over the past three months now just 35,000. Economists attribute the slowdown to a combination of factors, including President Trump's sweeping tariffs, which have raised costs and created uncertainty for businesses, and an intensifying immigration crackdown that has shrunk the labor force by over 300,000 since January 2025. Additionally, massive federal layoffs—84,000 jobs lost since January—have further dampened employment. The weak report has stirred recession fears, prompted calls for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, and led to political fallout, including President Trump's firing of BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, whom he accused of manipulating the data for political purposes.
Since January 2025, the federal government has laid off over 84,000 employees as part of a sweeping downsizing initiative under President Trump's second term, with more than 275,000 civil service positions eliminated or targeted for elimination—roughly 12% of the 2.4 million civilian workforce. This includes over 58,000 confirmed layoffs, 76,000 buyouts, and 149,000 planned reductions, driven by an extended hiring freeze and aggressive buyout programs offering $20,000 lump sums and health benefits. Agencies like the IRS have seen dramatic cuts—losing 25,000 employees—while others, including USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, have been shuttered entirely. The Supreme Court upheld the legality of these actions in July, despite criticism that they undermine essential services and violate labor protections.
As of 2025, approximately 43% of American households spend more than they earn each year, continuing a troubling trend in financial health. This figure reflects a mix of economic pressures, including rising costs of essentials, stagnant wages, and overreliance on credit. According to recent data, more than half of Americans admit to reckless spending, and 74% say they have an overspending problem, especially on groceries, online shopping, and entertainment. The mismatch between income and expenses is particularly pronounced among younger generations, with 43% of millennials and 53% of Gen Zers reporting that their lifestyle costs exceed their earnings.
As of 2025, the U.S. job market is experiencing a notable imbalance, with approximately 7 job seekers competing for every available opening. This heightened competition is driven by economic uncertainty, federal workforce reductions, and shifting industry demands. In response, job security has emerged as the top priority for candidates across sectors. Workers are increasingly seeking roles that offer long-term stability, reliable income, and protection against layoffs—often placing these factors above salary, location, or even flexibility. This shift reflects a broader desire for predictability in a rapidly evolving employment landscape.
The U.S. economy is a complex machine fueled by various industries. The Professional and Business Services sector, which includes legal, consulting, design, and administrative services sector, contributes $3.5 trillion to the economy. The Real Estate, Rental, and Leasing sector, encompassing property management, leasing, and sales, has a value of $3.3 trillion. The Manufacturing sector, despite declining shares, still matters; durable goods (like metals and computers) contribute $1.6 trillion, while nondurable goods (such as food and chemicals) add $1.3 trillion. The combined Healthcare, Education, and Social Assistance sector, which includes hospitals, schools, and social services, accounts for $2.3 trillion. The Finance and Insurance with a value of $2.0 trillion plays a crucial role in the economy. The Wholesale and Retail Trade sector, which involves buying, selling, and distributing goods contribute $1.7 trillion and $1.5 trillion, respectively. The Information industry, including tech and media, adds $1.5 trillion. The Arts, Entertainment, Recreation, Accommodation, and Food Services sector, collectively, contribute $1.2 trillion. The Construction sector, valued at $1.1 trillion, builds the U.S. infrastructure. Other Private Industries sector contributes a total of $2.6 trillion to the economy.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) defines the official unemployment rate as the number of active job seekers divided by the labor force. Active job seekers are individuals who are not working and have submitted a job application at least once in the past four weeks; as of June 2024, the unemployment rate in the US was 4.1%.
As of 2025, the total number of federal employees in the United States is approximately 3,001,000, reflecting significant shifts in workforce composition over the decades. The executive branch civilian workforce accounts for roughly 2,289,472 employees, while the active-duty military personnel—including members of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, and Coast Guard—totals around 1,310,000. The legislative and judicial branches employ an estimated 30,000 to 40,000 staff, maintaining relatively stable numbers. Compared to 1962, when there were over 5.3 million federal employees, the overall count has declined, primarily due to reductions in military size and the rise of technology-driven efficiencies across government operations.
As of 2025 in New York, despite the banking industry raking in billions in profits, nearly 40% of bank tellers rely on public assistance programs like food stamps, Medicaid, or the Earned Income Tax Credit to make ends meet. This stark contrast reveals how even within lucrative sectors, many frontline workers endure low wages and economic hardship—shifting the cost of basic living support onto public programs. Although much of the supporting data was collected over five years ago, the underlying structural challenges remain, underscoring persistent concerns around wage equity and the rising cost of living for essential workers.
As of 2025, approximately 51% of American workers earn less than $40,000 a year—a figure that underscores the financial strain many face despite being employed. While the median income for full-time wage and salary workers hovers between $47,000 and $50,000, this median means nearly half of the workforce earns less than that. When part-time and lower-wage positions are factored in, the $40,000 threshold captures a substantial portion of the labor force, particularly in service, retail, and entry-level jobs. Definitions of "worker" and whether the data considers individual or household income can shift the precise number, but overall, this statistic highlights the ongoing challenges of wage stagnation and income inequality in the U.S. economy.
As of 2025, the U.S. federal minimum wage remains unchanged at $7.25 per hour since 2009, lagging behind many developed nations, though states like California and New York have raised their minimums to around $16.50, and Washington D.C. tops the list at $17.50. In comparison, other countries offer significantly higher rates: Canada averages between $13.10 and $14.50 depending on the province; the U.K. pays about $15.70; the Netherlands and Ireland offer roughly $15.60 and $14.60 respectively; New Zealand's rate is $14.30; Belgium provides $15.90; France pays $13.90; Luxembourg guarantees around $16.90; and Australia leads with $15.90. These figures—converted to approximate U.S. dollar equivalents—reflect a wide gap in baseline earnings, underscoring global differences in labor policy and cost-of-living standards.
As of 2024, the percentage of Americans living paycheck to paycheck remains alarmingly high. A 2023 survey by Payroll.org found that 78% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, up from 72% the previous year. In 2024, a CNBC and SurveyMonkey survey reported that 65% of U.S. adults say they live paycheck to paycheck, a rise from 58% in 2023. This trend reflects growing financial strain due to inflation, rising interest rates, and stagnant wages. While the exact percentage for 2025 is still emerging, early indicators suggest the figure remains above 60%, with many households struggling to save or cover unexpected expenses.
Greeks work longer hours than nearly every other rich country—averaging around 39.9 hours per week, second only to South Koreans. That's 1.4 to 1.5 times more than Germans and the Dutch, who are often held up as paragons of industriousness. Italians, too, clock in hours comparable to Americans and well above their northern neighbors. Yet despite this relentless work ethic, productivity in these Mediterranean economies lags—not because people aren’t working hard, but because of structural issues like low investment in technology and high-value industries3. The real story isn't about laziness—it’s about the urgent need to modernize and unlock the full potential of a workforce that's already giving its all.
Since China's shift away from a centrally planned economy in the late 1970s and early 1980s, its labor force has been a major draw for foreign investment due to low wages and high productivity. However, minimum wages have steadily increased over the years. As of 2025, most provinces in China have monthly minimum wages exceeding $275, and in cities like Shanghai, the minimum wage reaches RMB 2,690 (about $370) per month. This reflects China's evolving labor market, rising living costs, and efforts to improve worker welfare—though wages still vary widely between urban and rural regions.
Switzerland and Singapore may sparkle as service-sector stars, but their economic engines hum with high-powered manufacturing. Despite their reputations for banking, tourism, and trade, both countries have quietly dominated global rankings in manufacturing value added (MVA) per capita. In 2002, Switzerland topped the world, outpacing even Japan by 24%. By 2010, Singapore surged to the front, producing 48% more MVA per capita than the U.S., with Switzerland close behind in third place. These figures reveal a deeper truth: their wealth isn't built on services alone, but on a sophisticated industrial base that includes precision instruments, pharmaceuticals, electronics, and advanced logistics. Far from being post-industrial relics, they're proof that "making things" still matters—and can coexist brilliantly with world-class service economies.
Singapore's economic story is often told as a triumph of free-market principles—open trade, foreign investment, and business-friendly policies. But beneath that glossy narrative lies a fascinating paradox. While the country ranks among the world's freest economies, it also boasts one of the most interventionist governments. Nearly all land is state-owned, and a staggering 85% of housing is provided by the Housing & Development Board. State-owned enterprises contribute around 22% of GDP—more than double the global average—yet they're run with remarkable efficiency, from Singapore Airlines to the port authority. This blend of market openness and strategic state control defies conventional economic dogma and challenges the idea that prosperity must come at the expense of public ownership. It's not just a "Singapore problem"—it's a Singapore puzzle, and one that rewrites the rules of what economic success can look like.

▷ Trade & Global Markets

Trade tensions are stirring global uncertainty, dimming prospects for growth and rattling markets worldwide. The World Trade Organization warns of a potential dip in merchandise trade, while services—usually the stable sibling—are now showing signs of strain. Tariffs as steep as 50% from major players like the U.S. have sparked retaliations, creating ripple effects across supply chains and driving countries to rethink how and where they do business. With North America possibly facing a double-digit export slump and currencies growing volatile, the economic weather forecast looks anything but sunny. Despite cautious optimism from the IMF, concerns linger over rising geopolitical friction and the possibility of a tariff rebound. Meanwhile, the UN urges nations to keep calm and collaborate, hoping to steer the ship away from fragmentation. It's a high-stakes chess match—and every move matters.
Global economic growth is inching forward—but with a limp. The forecast for 2025 sits at 2.8%, still shy of the pre-pandemic average of 3.2%, revealing a world economy that's trying to find its footing amid uncertainty. While easing inflation and softer monetary policies offer a breath of relief, a slew of challenges—including simmering trade tensions, geopolitical flashpoints, and ballooning debt levels—continue to cast long shadows over progress. Growth isn't just a number on a spreadsheet; it's a reflection of a world caught between resilience and fragility, where every percentage point tells a story of recovery that’s anything but straightforward.
In the global growth race of 2025, the pace is far from even. East and South Asia are sprinting ahead—with projected expansions of 4.7% and 5.7%—fueled by surging domestic demand and innovation-driven momentum. Africa, meanwhile, is expected to edge up to 3.7%, signaling progress but with hurdles in its lane. High debt costs, climate vulnerabilities, and fragile financial systems are acting as speed bumps on the continent's road to economic resilience. It's a tale of divergent paths: where one region rockets forward, another cautiously charts its course, reminding us that progress isn't just about numbers—it's about navigating the terrain that shapes them.
Several economic forecasts have raised alarms about a possible U.S. recession in late 2025 or early 2026, with some placing the odds as high as 60%, largely attributed to the sweeping tariffs recently imposed. These trade measures have fueled inflationary pressure by driving up import costs and constraining consumer spending, while also undermining business confidence and curbing investment. Although some analysts hold onto cautious optimism, the prevailing concern is that if these conditions persist, they could steer the economy into a prolonged downturn.

Tariff Shockwaves: The new tariffs—some as high as 50%—have driven up import costs, especially for consumer goods and manufacturing components.
Consumer Impact: JPMorgan estimates that 60% of the tariff costs are being passed directly to American consumers, leading to reduced spending.
Business Strain: Medium-sized businesses are struggling to absorb the added costs, prompting cutbacks in investment and hiring.
Economic Indicators: Goldman Sachs lowered its growth forecast for 2025 to 0.5%, citing declining confidence and tightening financial conditions.
Stagflation Fears: Economists warn of a stagflation scenario—sluggish growth paired with rising prices—which is notoriously difficult to manage.

Global inflation is on a downward slope, projected to ease from 4% in 2024 to 3.4% in 2025—a welcome breather for households and businesses alike. This cooling trend opens the door for monetary easing, potentially lowering borrowing costs and stimulating investment. But the picture isn't universally rosy. In many developing countries, inflation remains stubbornly high, especially when it comes to food prices. With over half of low- and lower-middle-income nations still facing food inflation above 5%, the cost of essentials continues to strain vulnerable populations. So while the global economy may be exhaling, millions are still holding their breath at the checkout counter.
Long before they became icons of free-market capitalism, Britain and the United States were building their economies behind walls of protectionism. In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, Britain wrapped its industries in layers of tariffs to shield domestic manufacturers from more advanced competitors across Europe, particularly in the Low Countries. Meanwhile, Alexander Hamilton—the sharp-minded, dueling Treasury Secretary immortalized on the ten-dollar bill—crafted the "infant industry argument," urging government intervention to foster fledgling sectors in economically backward nations. Though Hamilton died young in a pistol duel, his vision lived on: by the 1820s, the U.S. had fully embraced protectionism, transforming itself into the world's most insulated economy for nearly a century. The irony? These nations, now champions of open markets, once grew strong behind policies they'd later discourage, revealing that the path to prosperity is often paved with selective amnesia and strategic contradictions.
The road ahead looks rocky for many vulnerable economies as they face downward revisions in growth that fall well short of pre-pandemic benchmarks. This underperformance is more than a fiscal footnote—it's a direct threat to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, with poverty reduction efforts stuck in slow gear. Despite bright spots like Bhutan nearing poverty eradication and India lifting millions out of hardship, the global picture remains uneven and unsettling. With over 800 million people still in extreme poverty, compounded by mounting debt, climate shocks, and dwindling public investment, the stakes couldn't be higher. The moment calls for a bold reset—one that blends smarter financing, targeted policies, and global solidarity to turn fragile forecasts into resilient futures.
Overspending affects both savings rates and retirement readiness, creating long-term financial instability. With 43% of American households spending more than they earn, national savings rates have dropped to just 4.7%, leaving many vulnerable to emergencies and reliant on high-interest debt. This behavior leads to depleted savings, reduced retirement contributions, and delayed retirement, especially among younger generations—53% of Gen Z and 43% of millennials report lifestyle costs exceeding income. Many borrow from 401(k)s or misjudge their financial preparedness, compounding the risk. To improve financial health, individuals should track spending, create realistic budgets, build emergency funds, delay non-essential purchases, and seek professional guidance to address emotional spending and plan for long-term stability.
If the U.S. fails to implement its desired tariffs against allies and other global trading partners, the ripple effects could be far-reaching both economically and geopolitically. Economically, the absence of new tariffs may weaken the country's negotiating leverage, forgo potential government revenue, and allow persistent trade deficits to grow. On the diplomatic front, while reduced tensions may seem beneficial, inconsistent trade policy could undermine trust among allies and prompt countries to deepen ties with rival blocs such as BRICS or China. Domestically, Trump could face backlash from his base for softening his "America First" stance, potentially eroding political momentum. Financial markets may also react with volatility, especially if tariff measures were expected and priced in. Ultimately, stepping back from an aggressive tariff strategy could leave the U.S. navigating diminished global influence, deeper economic imbalances, and a shifting trade landscape where leadership is increasingly contested.
As of 2025, the elimination of USAID and most international assistance programs under the Trump administration has caused substantial economic, humanitarian, and strategic disruption. Domestically, it has affected thousands of jobs tied to aid-related contracts across universities, nonprofits, and private firms, while removing avenues for U.S. exporters to build relationships in emerging markets. Globally, the cuts have severely weakened America's soft power and its ability to respond to international crises such as disease outbreaks, famines, and conflict. A study from The Lancet warns the absence of aid could lead to over 14 million preventable deaths by 2030, including 4.5 million children under five, with destabilization in fragile regions likely to trigger increased migration pressures. Though the budget savings are small, the long-term costs—lost influence, strained global partnerships, and a diminished role in shaping global stability—may leave the U.S. more isolated and vulnerable in an increasingly interconnected world.
The tariffs imposed during Trump's administration have had a mixed impact on the U.S. economy. These tariffs aim to boost American manufacturing, protect domestic industries and reduce trade deficits by imposing taxes on imported goods; however, they also lead to increased costs for U.S. businesses that rely on imported materials, which are often passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices; these measures would contribute to inflation, slow economic growth, and increase higher risks of stagflation and recession.
Between 2020 and 2025, the U.S. economy has shown moderate growth, averaging around 2.1% annually, with pandemic-related disruptions in 2020 followed by strong rebounds in 2021 and 2023, and some slowdown in 2025. Exports contributed between 0.3 and 0.5 percentage points per year to this growth, with their impact tempered by high import volumes and global trade tensions. Jobs supported by exports remained substantial, with about 10.2 million U.S. jobs linked to export activity by 2022, including roughly 1.25 million from agricultural exports alone. While slightly below the 2013 peak of 11.3 million export-supported jobs, the figures highlight continued strength in global trade, particularly with top partners like Canada, Mexico, and China, which together supported over 4 million U.S. jobs. Prior to 2014, constituting less than 5 percent of the world's population, Americans generate and earn more than 20 percent of the world's total income. The U.S. has been the world's largest national economy and leading global trader. From the 2nd quarter of 2009 to the 3rd quarter of 2014, U.S. real GDP is up 2.3% at an annual rate, and exports have contributed one-third (0.7 percentage points) to this growth. Jobs supported by U.S. exports of goods and services are up an estimated 1.6 million since 2009, to an estimated 11.3 million in 2013.
Both China and India designate as developing countries - which are the countries with a less developed industrial base and a low human development index relative to other countries - even though they are ranked by the International Monetary Fund as the world's second and fifth largest economies. Developing countries tend to have some characteristics in common often due to low levels of access to safe drinking water, sanitation and hygiene; energy poverty; high levels of pollution; widespread poverty; low education levels, discriminations against people; corruption at all government levels; and a lack of so-called good governance.
In 2024, the United States recorded approximately 3.62 million births—a modest 1% increase from the previous year—but with a birth rate of just 10.9 per 1,000 people, less than half the rate of 25.2 recorded in 1956 during the height of the post–World War II baby boom. Back then, over 4.2 million babies were born, marking one of the peak years in mid-20th-century U.S. demographics. Today's general fertility rate of 54.6 births per 1,000 women aged 15–44 underscores a persistent downward trend, as Americans increasingly delay parenthood and have fewer children, reflecting a profound and ongoing demographic shift.
As of 2025, minimum wages across East and Southeast Asia vary significantly by country, ranging from under $30 to well over $1,000 per month. Bangladesh's minimum wage is around $115–133 USD, while Cambodia and Vietnam both offer roughly $208 monthly. Indonesia's minimum wage is regionally based and averages around $25–30 USD, whereas the Philippines pays about $251. China's wages range from $258 to $384 depending on the province, and India offers $213–281 monthly. Malaysia and Thailand pay $364 and $336 respectively, while Laos and Myanmar sit lower at $130 and $145. Bangladesh is set at $115 per month. Sri Lanka remains among the lowest at $42 per month. Higher-income nations like Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea provide significantly stronger wages, paying approximately $811, $870, $1,198, and $1,571 per month, respectively. Singapore stands out for having no universal minimum wage, though it maintains sector-specific wage protections. These figures reflect national policies, local economies, and cost-of-living considerations.
The World Bank is an international organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., established in 1944, that provides financial and technical assistance to developing countries with the goal of reducing poverty and supporting sustainable development. Unlike a traditional bank, it consists of two main institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). Owned by 189 member countries, the World Bank offers low-interest loans, interest-free credit, and grants to improve education, healthcare, infrastructure, agriculture, and financial systems. With over 10,000 employees across more than 120 offices worldwide, it plays a vital role in helping emerging market economies strengthen governance, expand access to services, and manage natural resources more effectively.

▷ GDP & Economic Growth

By 2035, the global economic landscape is expected to shift significantly, with emerging powers rising and traditional leaders adapting to demographic and technological changes. Based on projections of GDP (especially purchasing power parity), innovation capacity, and population trends, the top 10 economies with the greatest potential are likely to include China, United States, India, Japan, Indonesia, Germany, Brazil, Russia, South Korea, and Vietnam. These countries aren't just big—they're increasingly strategic, embracing automation, clean energy, and digital transformation to stay ahead.

Country	Leading Growth Sectors	Notes
China	AI, renewable energy, advanced manufacturing, electric vehicles	Aggressive state investment and global supply chain leadership
United States	Technology, finance, biotech, defense	Innovation and consumer power continue to drive growth
India	Digital services, fintech, pharmaceuticals, infrastructure	Young population and ambitious government reforms
Japan	Robotics, precision engineering, renewable energy	High-tech strength despite aging demographics
Indonesia	E-commerce, mining, consumer goods, logistics	Rising middle class and digital expansion
Germany	Automotive (EVs), green tech, high-end machinery	Efficiency and industrial leadership in Europe
Brazil	Agriculture, energy, mining, digital banking	Natural resource wealth plus expanding tech scene
Russia	Energy exports, cybersecurity, defense industries	Stable export revenue but faces geopolitical risks
South Korea	Semiconductors, biotech, gaming, consumer electronics	Global innovation hub with strong IP protections
Vietnam	Apparel, electronics, shipping, education tech	Manufacturing magnet and talent-rich population

The global economic landscape in 2025 is a fascinating mix of scale and momentum. The United States continues to lead with a staggering nominal GDP of $30.51 trillion, maintaining its long-held position as the world' largest economy. China follows as the second-largest, boasting a GDP of $19.23 trillion, driven by its massive manufacturing base and expanding consumer market. On a per-person basis, the U.S. also shines with a GDP per capita of $89,105, reflecting its high-income status and robust productivity. Meanwhile, the world economy is expected to grow steadily, with global growth projected at 3.0% in 2025 and 3.1% in 2026. These figures suggest a cautiously optimistic outlook, especially as countries navigate post-pandemic recovery, technological shifts, and geopolitical tensions.
Trump's administration's tariffs would lead to a loss of approximately 310,000 full-time equivalent jobs, and reduce U.S. GDP by an estimated 0.4%. They would lead to a decline in U.S. exports, particularly in agriculture, especially producers of soybeans, sorghum, and pork, with estimated annual losses of $13.2 billion across various states and commodities. Additionally, the tariffs would disrupt global supply chains, create uncertainty in trade relationships and impact U.S. exports due to retaliatory tariffs from other countries, and further strain economic ties between the U.S. and its trading partners.
Manufacturing, automotive, agriculture & food processing, retail, construction, mining & energy, services, and insurance, which are reliant on imported materials and global trade, are the most affected industries and sectors significantly impacted by the tariffs.

Manufacturing: This sector is among the hardest hit, especially industries that rely on imported raw materials and components. Electronics, transportation equipment, machinery, and computer components are facing higher costs due to tariffs on Chinese imports.
Automotive: Car manufacturers and parts suppliers are struggling with increased costs due to tariffs on steel, aluminum, and semiconductors. Some automakers are lobbying for exemptions.
Agriculture & Food Processing: Tariffs on imported agricultural products and raw materials are disrupting supply chains. The U.S. agricultural industry, which exports heavily to China, is facing significant losses.
Retail: Businesses that rely on imported goods—such as clothing, electronics, and toys—are seeing price increases and supply chain challenges. Some companies are shifting production to other countries like Vietnam and Indonesia.
Construction: Rising costs for imported materials like steel and lumber are affecting homebuilders and commercial developers. The residential and commercial real estate sectors are particularly vulnerable.
Mining & Energy: Industries that depend on imported primary metals and minerals are experiencing higher costs. Oil refiners and energy imports from Canada are also affected.
Services: While not directly subject to tariffs, the services sector—including law, consulting, accounting, and financial services—is indirectly impacted as businesses cut back spending due to economic uncertainty.
Insurance: Inflationary pressures from tariffs are increasing claims costs for auto and property insurers. Supply chain disruptions and material shortages are driving up premiums.

The world's most strong economy systems in 2024 included Switzerland, Denmark, Singapore, India (fastest-growing economy), Vietnam (fastest-growing economy), and United States (top ten GDP and GDP per capita rankings in nominal terms).
- Switzerland: The country continues to have a resilient economy with low unemployment and inflation rates; its GDP growth forecast for 2024 is around 1.1%.
- Denmark: The country is experiencing robust growth, its economy is driven by strong net exports and a high level of productivity, with a GDP expansion of 3% in 2024.
- Singapore: The growth Singapore's economy was supported by strong performance in the manufacturing and services sectors, it grew by 4% in 2024, outperforming expectations.
- India: Indian economic reforms and digital transformation are key drivers of its growth; the country is the fastest-growing major economy, with a GDP growth rate projected to be around 6-7% in 2024.
- Vietnam: Vietnam's export-oriented economy and foreign investments are major contributors to its growth; the country is among the fastest-growing economies, with a GDP growth rate expected to be around 6-7% in 2024.
- United States: The U.S. leads in both GDP and GDP per capita rankings in nominal terms, the country remains one of the top economies globally, with a GDP growth rate projected to be around 2-3% in 2024.
In 2024, the world's strongest economies, based on GDP, are United States, China, Germany, Japan, and India.

United States: The U.S. continues to hold the top spot with a GDP of approximately $26.95 trillion; its economy is highly diversified, with strong sectors in manufacturing, services, technology, and finance.
China: China remains the second-largest economy with a GDP of around $17.79 trillion; its economic strength is driven by exports, production, and substantial investments.
Germany: Germany holds the third position with a GDP of about $4.43 trillion; It's known for its robust automotive, chemical, and mechanical industries.
Japan: Japan ranks fourth with a GDP of approximately $4.23 trillion; its economy excels in sectors such as automotive, engineering, pharmaceuticals, and chemicals.
India: India is the fifth-largest economy with a GDP of around $3.73 trillion; its growth is fueled by various sectors, including business, industrial, services, and IT.

Across Africa, the fiscal squeeze is tightening. Governments are cautiously embracing fiscal consolidation to restore debt sustainability, but the path is steep—especially when interest payments are swallowing a growing share of public revenues. In 2024, African nations allocated a staggering 27% of their revenues to debt servicing, a sharp rise from 19% in 2019 and just 7% in 2007. This surge is more than a budgetary concern; it's a redirection of funds away from critical services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. The continent's fiscal space is shrinking, and unless debt burdens are reined in, the cost of borrowing could continue to crowd out the investments needed for long-term development.
The strength of the U.S. dollar is attributed to U.S. economic health, interest rates, safe-haven status, and global reserve currency. The strong U.S. economy, which is currently stronger than many other major economies, makes the dollar more attractive to investors around the world. The U.S. Federal Reserve has raised interest rates to combat inflation, this attracts many foreign investors to seek higher returns, which increases demand for the dollar. The U.S. dollar is considered as a safe-haven currency for investors, who flock to the dollar when other markets are volatile. The dollar's status as the world's primary reserve currency is widely used in international trade and finance, further bolstering its strength. These factors combined have contributed to the dollar's recent strength against other major currencies.
A strong dollar can attract foreign investment into U.S. assets, such as stocks and bonds, as investors seek stability and higher returns. It also helps lower inflation, which brings cheaper imports that can help lower costs for imported goods and lower prices for consumers.
The U.S. dollar, which has been the dominant reserve currency, plays a crucial role in the global economy. It is widely trusted as a store of value, and comprises 60% of globally disclosed official foreign reserves, surpassing other currencies like the euro, yen, and pound. A stronger dollar can boost demand for products worldwide, benefiting both domestic and foreign companies. However, it can also negatively affect low-income countries with dollar-denominated debt.
Finland's story flips the script on the old assumption that inequality fuels growth. Despite being one of the most egalitarian societies—more equal even than the former Soviet bloc during its socialist heyday—Finland has consistently outpaced the U.S. in key development metrics. Its low income inequality, reflected in a Gini coefficient of just 0.23 among retirees, pairs with strong social cohesion and high-quality public services. Meanwhile, the U.S., one of the most unequal rich nations, faces mounting evidence that inequality hampers not just social outcomes but economic dynamism itself. Finland's success suggests that equity and prosperity aren't rivals—they're co-conspirators. It's a compelling case for rethinking the trade-off between fairness and growth.
The Consumer Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), produced by the BLS, is a common measure of inflation. It reflects the price paid by urban consumers for a representative basket of goods and services. Inflation measures the increase in prices over time. In May 2024, prices had increased by 3.3 percent compared to May 2023 according to the 12-month percentage change in the consumer price index — the monthly inflation rate for goods and services in the United States.
In 2023 the federal government collected around $4.44 trillion in revenue and spent $6.13 trillion, the deficit for FY23 was $1.70 trillion. From the 2018 to 2021 fiscal years, the government collected $14.3 trillion in revenue, and spent $21.9 trillion. In that time, mandatory spending on programs such as Social Security and Medicare totaled $14.7 trillion alone. Discretionary spending totaled about $5.8 trillion. During Trump administration, tax cuts added roughly another $1 trillion to the federal deficit from 2018 to 2021, even after factoring in economic growth spurred by the tax cuts. The first coronavirus stimulus package, which received near unanimous support in Congress, added $2 trillion to the deficit over the next two fiscal years. Three additional spending measures contending with Covid-19 and its economic ramifications added another $1.4 trillion.
As of 2025, the middle class in the United States took home approximately 43% of all income—a figure that reflects its shrinking share over the decades. In 1970, that share was closer to 62%, but shifts in the economy, including rising income inequality, automation, globalization, and declining union membership, have disproportionately benefited upper-income households. While the exact percentage depends on how one defines "middle class," research—like that from Pew—shows this general decline holds true. Importantly, being "middle class" today involves more than income; it also reflects lifestyle, job stability, debt levels, education access, and a sense of financial security, all of which have become harder to maintain for many Americans.
As of 2025, the ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China are reshaping the global supply chain, with Vietnam emerging as a potential winner for investors. A new trade agreement between the U.S. and Vietnam, introduced in July, imposes a 20% tariff on most Vietnamese exports and a sharper 40% tariff on goods suspected of being transshipped from China. In return, Vietnam has agreed to expand market access for U.S. products and tighten enforcement on rules of origin, aiming to position itself as a reliable and compliant manufacturing hub. These developments—combined with Vietnam's competitive labor costs and growing appeal as a China-alternative—are drawing increased investor interest, although enforcement challenges and geopolitical dynamics remain important factors to watch.
As of 2025, the average American carried nearly four credit cards, with Gen X and Baby Boomers typically holding even more. While most people don't juggle 10 cards, around 14% of credit card holders—about one in seven Americans—have 10 or more open accounts. Though it's far from typical, this snapshot reveals the broad spectrum of credit usage across the population, from strategic point maximizers to those more reliant on credit for financial flexibility.
Around 41% of working-age Americans—about 72 million people—are dealing with medical debt, either by actively paying it off or struggling with bills they can't afford, according to recent survey data. When older adults are included, the total rises to approximately 79 million. This financial strain disproportionately affects those with lower incomes, inadequate insurance coverage, and communities of color, though even insured individuals face high deductibles and out-of-pocket costs that often lead to debt. Many report lifestyle changes or encounters with collection agencies as a result, highlighting the deep and persistent connection between health care costs and economic stress in the U.S.
Today around 48.8 percent of all 25-year-old Americans and approximate 19 percent of all American men between the ages of 25 and 34 still live at home with their parents.
The Great Recession was a period of marked general decline, i.e. a recession, observed in national economies globally that occurred between 2007 and 2009. The causes of this Great Recession include a combination of vulnerabilities that developed in the financial system, along with housing prices falling in the U.S. and homeowners abandoning their mortgages, and the value of mortgage-backed securities held by investment banks collapsed; the household net worth, which reflects the value of both stock markets and housing prices, fell $11.5 trillion (17.3%) and did not regain its pre-recession level of $66.4 trillion until Q3 2012.
One of the purposes of manipulation of currency is to weaken currency. In order to manipulate currency the country sells its own currency and buys foreign currency – usually U.S. dollars. Following the laws of supply and demand, the result is that the manipulating country reduces the demand for its own currency while increasing the demand for foreign currencies. The International Monetary Foundation (IMF) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) have provisions prohibiting the use of currency manipulation to gain trade advantages.
As of early 2025, poverty and homelessness continue to deeply affect American society, with around 36.8 million people—11.1% of the population—living in poverty, including a troubling 15.3% of children. African Americans face significantly higher rates, with a 17.9% poverty rate and about one in three Black children growing up in poverty, while the Black unemployment rate (6.8% in June 2025) remains nearly double that of whites. Homelessness reached a record high in 2024, with over 771,000 people unhoused, and sharp increases among families and children—39.4% and 33% respectively—especially in major urban centers. Economic disparities persist, with Black workers earning 20% less than their white counterparts despite similar education levels, revealing persistent structural inequalities in employment and income. As of May 2018, about 41 American million people live in poverty, of which 18.5 million of them in extreme poverty and over 550,000 people are homeless in America. African Americans are almost 2.5 times more likely than whites to live in poverty and their unemployment rate is more than double.
As of 2025, the world's top ten economies by nominal GDP are the United States, China, Germany, India, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, and Brazil. India has notably climbed ahead of Japan, becoming the fourth-largest economy, while Germany maintains its position as Europe's strongest economy despite ongoing challenges. This ranking reflects shifts in global economic dynamics, with emerging markets like India accelerating growth and traditional powerhouses adapting to new fiscal and geopolitical realities.
As of 2025, China remains the world's largest economy when measured by GDP based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP), reaching approximately $40.7 trillion, compared to the United States' $30.5 trillion. Yet, the U.S. continues to lead in GDP per capita, a key indicator of individual prosperity, with Americans enjoying a PPP-adjusted income of around $89,105—nearly three times higher than China's $28,978. This gap emphasizes the sheer scale of China's population-driven output versus the higher standard of living in the U.S. Back in 2017, China had already overtaken the U.S. in PPP GDP, recording $23.19 trillion to America's $19.42 trillion, while the U.S. maintained a substantial lead in per capita GDP at roughly $59,609, compared to China's $16,676. The trajectory over the past decade illustrates China's continued expansion and the persistent contrast in individual wealth.
As of 2025, Singapore ranks as the world's freest economy with an economic freedom score of 84.1, followed by Switzerland (83.7), Ireland (83.1), and Taiwan (79.7). Hong Kong, which led the index in 2017 with a score of 89.8%, has seen a dramatic decline due to increased government intervention and is no longer among the top economies. Countries like New Zealand, Luxembourg, and Denmark now occupy the higher ranks, while Australia, once fifth with 81.0%, has slipped to 13th with a score of 76.2. The United States, previously rated at 75.1% economically free, now stands at 70.1%, reflecting a notable shift over the years. Meanwhile, nations with the least economic freedom remain consistent, with North Korea (2.9), Venezuela (28.1), Cuba (25.7), Republic of Congo (47.8), and Eritrea (39.5) still characterized by heavy state control and minimal market openness.
As of 2025, approximately 74 million Americans are receiving Social Security benefits, including 61.4 million through Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and about 8.2 million through Disability Insurance (DI). Meanwhile, Medicare coverage has expanded to serve around 67.6 million people, encompassing both seniors and younger individuals with qualifying disabilities. Average monthly benefits have also increased, with retired workers receiving around $2,002, disabled workers about $1,582, and survivors approximately $1,567. These figures reflect steady growth from the 2015–2016 levels, when 58 million Americans received Social Security, including 49.2 million under OASI and 10.8 million through DI, and 55.3 million were covered by Medicare. The upward trend is largely driven by an aging population and cost-of-living adjustments.
As of 2025, the total debt in the United States—including federal government, nonfinancial business, and household debt—has ballooned to approximately $76.3 trillion, a steep rise from $56 trillion in 2016 and under $2 trillion back in 1970. This encompasses about $36.2 trillion in federal government debt, $21.6 trillion in business debt, and $20.4 trillion owed by households. The sharp increase over the decades highlights expanding credit markets, sustained budget deficits, and greater borrowing across sectors. Notably, gross federal debt now stands at 126.4% of GDP, underscoring ongoing concerns about fiscal sustainability and long-term economic resilience.
The strong signs of economic crisis include massive layoffs; non affordable accommodation surplus; halt or cancellation of construction activities; real estate value dips; restructuring or closure of businesses; retail, travel, hospitality and technology falling; and fall in oil prices.
As of 2025, Dubai's population has grown significantly to approximately 3.95 million residents, up from 2.643 million in 2016. The city remains one of the most diverse in the world, with expatriates making up about 92% of the population—roughly 3.53 million people. Asians continue to dominate the demographic landscape, accounting for around 85% of the population, with the largest groups being Indians (51%), Pakistanis (17%), Bangladeshis (9%), Filipinos (3%), and Sri Lankans. Individuals of Iranian origin still represent a substantial portion, though their share has declined slightly to about 4.72% of the total population. The gender ratio remains skewed, with men comprising nearly 68.6% of the population due to labor migration trends.
As of 2025, Norway's Government Pension Fund Global (GPFG) has soared to over $1.9 trillion in assets, doubling its value since 2015 when it held $873 billion. This growth is driven by strong returns from global equity markets, particularly U.S. tech stocks, and steady inflows from petroleum revenues generated by its state-owned North Sea oil operations. In 2024 alone, the fund earned a robust 13% return, adding roughly $222 billion in profits. Though it experienced a modest -0.6% loss in Q1 2025 due to tech sector volatility, the fund remains highly diversified and resilient, with around 70% invested in equities, 27% in fixed income, and the remainder in real estate and renewable energy infrastructure—marking its continued dominance as the world's largest sovereign wealth fund.
As of 2025, the wealth held by the 20 richest Americans exceeds the combined net worth of the poorest 152 million U.S. citizens, highlighting an extreme concentration of economic power. This elite group—including billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Larry Ellison, and Mark Zuckerberg—collectively possess over $2 trillion, while the bottom half of the population holds significantly less. Overall, the top 10% of Americans now control more than 71.2% of the nation's total wealth, underscoring the deep and growing disparities that continue to fuel urgent conversations around taxation policy, equitable growth, and social mobility in the United States.
As of 2025, Americans' savings habits have improved slightly but still reflect widespread financial vulnerability. Around 28% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings, down from 62% in 20152. However, 41% report having $500 or less, and 71% have $5,000 or less, indicating that many households remain financially fragile. Additionally, 24% of Americans say they have no emergency savings at all, and 30% admit they don't contribute to savings monthly. Rising living costs and debt repayment are the top barriers to saving, with over half of Americans citing inflation as the main reason they can't save more.
From March 2020 through January 2025, the S&P 500 gained approximately 97%, assuming dividends were reinvested. This period includes a sharp rebound following the pandemic-induced crash in early 2020, strong performance in 2021, a volatile 2022 with losses, and a steady recovery through 2023 and 2024. While this gain is less than the 135% surge seen in earlier bull runs like 2009–2013 or 1996–2000, it still represents a robust annualized return of about 13.4%, beating inflation and reinforcing the index's long-term growth trajectory.
According to research from the National Bureau of Economic Research, nearly 46% of Americans die with less than $10,000 in financial assets. While many retirees maintain a relatively comfortable lifestyle thanks to Social Security and pensions, they often pass away with very limited savings. This trend reflects deep economic insecurity among older adults, especially those who are single or lack access to robust retirement plans.
As of 2025, the U.S. economy has expanded by approximately 35% since 2008, rising from a GDP of about $14.7 trillion to over $30 trillion, showcasing strong real growth and substantial gains in per capita income. In contrast, the U.K. economy, which stood at roughly £1.5 trillion in 2008, has grown to around £2.3 trillion in 2025—an increase of about 53% in nominal terms. However, when adjusted for inflation and population changes, the U.K.'s real GDP per capita has remained relatively stagnant or slightly declined, pointing to weaker productivity and slower improvement in living standards compared to the United States.
As of 2025, the European Union and Vietnam continue to benefit from the EU-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement, which has been in effect since August 2020 and eliminates 99% of tariffs on traded goods, boosting annual bilateral trade to over $35 billion, up from $30 billion previously. The EU also maintains comprehensive free trade agreements with South Korea, active since 2011 and enhanced in 2025 through a Digital Trade Agreement, and with Singapore, whose 2019 deal was similarly expanded by a 2025 digital accord. These partnerships reflect the EU's strategic push to strengthen economic ties with key Asian markets through liberalized trade and digital integration.
Greece's GDP has shrunk by 25% in six years since 2009; the unemployment rate went from 10% in 2010 to 25% in March, 2015; the young are hit the worst, with one in two under the age of 25 having no job; and over 3% of its population (11 million) has left the country since 2010. By 2025, Greece has made notable progress since its economic collapse, with GDP rising to approximately $267.3 billion and growth projected between 2.0% and 2.3% annually. The overall unemployment rate has dropped significantly, reaching 7.9% in May 2025—its lowest level since 2008—while youth unemployment, though still elevated, declined to around 20.4%. Population trends remain delicate, with Greece's population at 10.4 million in early 2024, slightly down from previous years. However, net migration turned positive, with over 42,000 more arrivals than departures in 2024, helped by regularization efforts that saw thousands of undocumented migrants gain legal status. Despite lingering challenges, these indicators suggest a gradually stabilizing economy and labor market alongside demographic shifts driven by migration.
As of 2025, American International Group (AIG) has emerged as a streamlined, tech-driven global insurance leader with a market capitalization of roughly $47.5 billion and a stock price near $82.41 per share. Operating across North America Commercial, International Commercial, and Global Personal segments, AIG reported $4.5 billion in net premiums written for Q1 2025—an 8% increase year-over-year—alongside its best first-quarter underwriting performance since the 2008 financial crisis. The firm is embracing generative AI in underwriting and claims processing through partnerships with Palantir and Anthropic, modernizing its operations while returning $2.5 billion to shareholders via dividends and buybacks. AIG also raised its quarterly dividend by 12.5%, reflecting a confident outlook and underscoring its transformation into a financially strong, innovation-focused insurer well positioned for the future. During a global financial crisis in 2008 the U.S. Federal government bailed out $182 billion to American International Group, Inc. – also known as AIG - an American multinational insurance corporation with more than 88 million customers in 130 countries, to prevent the company's collapse. As of 2017 the U.S. government received a repaid amount of $205 billion, which is a 13 percent return on the funds it provided to AIG.
As of 2025, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac remain in conservatorship under the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), but have evolved into leaner, more financially sound entities. Fannie Mae reported $3.7 billion in net income for Q1 2025, boosting its net worth to $98.3 billion, while Freddie Mac earned $2.8 billion with a net worth of $62 billion. Together, they financed over 600,000 home purchases, refinancings, and rental units in that quarter alone, with a strong emphasis on affordability—more than half of their loans supported first-time homebuyers, and over 90% of rental units funded were affordable to low- and moderate-income families. The FHFA has introduced reforms like the adoption of VantageScore 4.0 to broaden credit access, while the Trump administration has continued exploring privatization options, implementing executive shakeups and fraud cleanups in pursuit of a more accountable and market-driven future for both entities. During a global financial crisis in 2008 in order to prevent Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from bankruptcy the U.S. government bailed out $187 billion to these giant mortgage companies and placed them into conservatorship of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). As of 2017 the Federal government received a repaid amount of $225 billion, which is a 20 percent return on the funds it provided to these companies.
As of 2025, the United States holds an economic freedom score of 70.1, placing it 25th globally in the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom—a notable drop from its 2015 score of 76.2 and 12th-place ranking. This decline reflects growing concerns over ballooning government debt, increased regulatory complexity, and deteriorating fiscal health, despite strong performance in areas such as property rights, business freedom, and investment freedom. The country remains in the "mostly free" category, but its fiscal policies and spending patterns continue to weigh heavily on its overall standing in the global economic landscape.
As of 2025, the total debt in the United States—including government, business, consumer, and student obligations—has soared to an estimated $58 to $60 trillion, continuing its rapid climb from approximately $54 trillion in 2023 and $56.5 trillion in 2024. This includes over $36 trillion in federal government debt alone by mid-2025, with projections pointing to $37 trillion by year-end. Corporate borrowing exceeds $12 trillion, while household liabilities remain high with mortgage debt at around $12.5 trillion, credit card balances at $1.3 trillion, auto loans near $1.6 trillion, and student loan debt stable at approximately $1.6 trillion. Compared to the pre-1970 total debt level of under $2 trillion, this dramatic expansion reflects decades of rising public and private borrowing, driven by low interest rates, expansive fiscal policies, and the normalization of credit in American economic life.
As of 2025, approximately 37% of homeless Americans are employed, continuing a trend observed in recent years despite a slight decline from the 44% reported in 2020. In 2024, about 39% of unhoused individuals held jobs—whether full-time, part-time, or seasonal—highlighting the persistent gap between employment and housing security. Low wages, inconsistent schedules, limited access to transportation, and unaffordable rent in many urban areas mean that even working individuals often remain unhoused, underscoring the complex socioeconomic challenges that prevent employment from serving as a reliable path out of homelessness.
Between May 2020 and April 2025, Americans donated approximately $3.7 million to the U.S. Treasury to help reduce the national debt. These contributions—often symbolic—come from individuals who voluntarily send money to the government, sometimes as part of a bequest or personal gesture of civic responsibility. While the amount is far smaller than the $19.1 million donated during 2008–2012, it still reflects a steady stream of goodwill, even amid rising debt levels and economic uncertainty.
As of 2025, the top destinations for U.S. goods exports largely mirror the 2013 rankings, though notable shifts in trade volumes and positions have occurred. Canada remains the largest export partner with $348.5 billion in goods received, followed closely by Mexico at $334 billion. China ranks third at $143.5 billion, while the Netherlands, benefiting from its role as a key European logistics hub, has climbed to fourth with $89.6 billion. The United Kingdom and Japan are tied at $79.9 billion, ahead of Germany with $75.6 billion, South Korea at $65.5 billion, Brazil at $49.7 billion, and Singapore—replacing Hong Kong—rounding out the top ten with $46 billion. These shifts reflect evolving global trade dynamics, geopolitical tensions, and supply chain realignments influencing U.S. export flows.
As of 2025, the top 10 exporters to the United States reflect strong regional ties and global manufacturing hubs, led by Mexico at $505.9 billion and Canada at $412.7 billion, underscoring North America's integrated supply chains. China remains a dominant source with $438.9 billion in exports, despite ongoing trade tensions, while Vietnam, Taiwan, and South Korea each provide essential electronics and consumer goods. Germany and Japan maintain robust shipments of automobiles and machinery, valued at $160.4 billion and $148.2 billion respectively. Ireland, contributing $103.2 billion, is a key exporter of pharmaceuticals and medical products, and India rounds out the list with $87.4 billion, supplying a mix of textiles, generics, and tech services. These rankings reflect evolving trade strategies and shifting sourcing patterns, particularly diversification away from China toward Southeast Asia and nearshoring to North America.
As of 2024 and 2025, poverty rates in the United States have declined compared to the highs of the early 2010s. In 2023, the official poverty rate fell to 11.1%, with approximately 36.8 million people living in poverty. The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which accounts for government assistance and regional cost differences, was slightly higher at 12.9%, with child poverty under the SPM rising to 13.7%. For 2025, early estimates suggest the overall poverty rate remains around 11.0% to 11.2%, with child poverty hovering near 13%, reflecting persistent economic challenges despite improvements in employment and income levels. These figures mark a significant improvement from the 16% overall and 20% child poverty rates recorded in 2012.
As of 2024 and 2025, child poverty in the United States remains a pressing concern, with recent data showing a troubling reversal of progress made during the early 2020s. In 2023, the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) child poverty rate rose to 13.7%, up from 12.4% in 2022 and significantly higher than the historic low of 5.2% in 20212. This increase is largely attributed to the expiration of pandemic-era support programs, including the expanded Child Tax Credit. Experts warn that inflation, stagnant real wages, and rising housing costs have disproportionately affected families with children, pushing millions back below the poverty line. While official 2025 figures are still being finalized, early estimates suggest the child poverty rate remains elevated, hovering near 13% to 14%, with racial disparities persisting—Black and Hispanic children continue to experience poverty at rates more than double those of white children.
Since 2011, the U.S. share of global GDP has shown a fluctuating trajectory. It fell to 21.1% in 2011, continuing a decades-long decline, but gradually recovered throughout the 2010s—reaching around 24% by 2019, bolstered by post-recession growth and technology-led expansion. Despite disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the U.S. maintained a strong position at 25%, and by 2024, its share climbed to 26.3%, the highest in over a decade, driven by resilient consumer spending, advances in AI-driven productivity, and a slower pace of growth in other major economies like the EU and China. In 2025, projections suggest the U.S. will hold steady at 26.3%, reinforcing its role as the world's largest contributor to global economic activity.

▷ Skills & Education

The United States leads by a wide margin when it comes to Nobel Prizes in Economic Sciences. As of 2024, American economists have won the prize 63 times, reflecting the country's deep academic infrastructure and influence in the field. United States, United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, are Israel the top countries by number of laureates. These numbers include dual citizens and reflect the nationality at the time of the award. The dominance of U.S.-based institutions like the University of Chicago, MIT, and Harvard also plays a big role in shaping global economic thought.

United States – 63 laureates
United Kingdom – 10 laureates
France – 4 laureates
Canada – 4 laureates
Norway – 3 laureates
Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Israel – 2 laureates each

While most Nobel laureates in Economic Sciences hold formal degrees in economics, a few notable exceptions come from different academic backgrounds. These laureates show that transformative economic thinking doesn't always come from within the economics department.

Herbert A. Simon (1978) – He had a PhD in political science and made foundational contributions to decision-making theory and behavioral economics.
Daniel Kahneman (2002) – A psychologist by training, Kahneman earned a PhD in psychology and was honored for integrating psychological insights into economic science, particularly in judgment and decision-making.
Elinor Ostrom (2009) – She held a PhD in political science and was the first woman to win the prize. Her work on how communities manage common resources challenged traditional economic assumptions.

Winning the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences—officially the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel is awarded to individuals who have made outstanding contributions to the field of economics, often through groundbreaking theories, empirical research, or methodological innovations that significantly advance the understanding of economic processes. The process includes nomination is by invitation only, self-nomination is not allowed, selection is handled by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, and the work must stand the test of time. There's a long list of brilliant minds who've shaped the field of economics and earned the Nobel Prize for it. Below are some of these laureates who brought something unique to the table—whether it was theory, policy, or real-world application.

Esther Duflo, Abhijit Banerjee, and Michael Kremer (2019) – This trio was honored for pioneering experimental approaches to alleviating global poverty, using randomized controlled trials to test policy effectiveness.
Elinor Ostrom (2009) – The first woman to win the prize, she challenged conventional wisdom by showing how communities can successfully manage common resources without top-down regulation.
Paul Krugman (2008) – Known for his work on international trade and economic geography, Krugman also brought economic insights to the public through his writing and commentary.
Amartya Sen (1998) – Celebrated for his work on welfare economics and social choice theory, Sen's research has had a profound impact on development economics and human rights.
Milton Friedman (1976) – A leading figure in monetarism, he reshaped macroeconomic policy with his work on consumption analysis and monetary theory.
Paul Samuelson (1970) – The first American to win the prize, he revolutionized economic theory with mathematical models that brought new rigor to the field.

The Great Recession, which stretched from December 2007 to June 2009, marked the longest U.S. economic downturn since World War II, lasting 19 months—nearly double the average duration of typical postwar recessions. Though its impact was severe, especially in terms of widespread job losses and financial market upheaval, it didn't rival the devastation of the Great Depression, which spanned nearly a decade beginning in 1929 and brought about multiple waves of economic collapse. While historically significant, the 2007–2009 recession remained far shorter and less structurally damaging by comparison.
As of 2024 and 2025, poverty rates in the United States continue to show sharp disparities across household types and gender. Married-couple families had a relatively low poverty rate of 4.6% in 2023, with little change projected for 2025. In contrast, single-parent households—especially those headed by women—faced far higher rates, with 21.8% of female-headed families living in poverty, compared to 11.4% for male-headed counterparts. Individuals living alone also experienced persistent economic hardship, with 19.2% in poverty. More than 75% of poor households continued to be led by women, accounting for over 11.3 million people below the poverty line, underscoring ongoing structural inequities and the intersection of gender, family status, and economic vulnerability. According to the US Census, in 2007 5.8% of all people in married families lived in poverty, as did 26.6% of all persons in single parent households, and 19.1% of all persons living alone; more than 75% of all poor households are headed by women (2012)
President Trump's recently signed "Big Beautiful Bill" includes sweeping overhauls to Medicaid and food assistance, with significant cuts and tighter eligibility requirements projected to impact millions. Beginning no later than December 2026, Medicaid recipients aged 19 to 64 must meet monthly work requirements of 80 hours, while states are mandated to verify eligibility twice a year and will face $1 trillion in funding reductions over the next decade, likely causing up to 12 million people to lose coverage. Clinics providing abortion or gender transition care will be excluded from Medicaid reimbursements, and undocumented immigrants will no longer be covered. Food assistance via SNAP will also see major changes: work requirements now apply to individuals aged 55 to 64, and parents of children older than six lose exemptions. Starting in 2028, states must contribute at least 5% toward SNAP benefit costs, eligibility will be restricted to permanent legal residents, and any future increases will require congressional approval—projected to cut $230–300 billion over ten years and heighten food insecurity nationwide.
In California, more than 300,000 low-wage employees—including workers at major companies like Walmart and Costco—qualify for Medi-Cal, the state's health insurance program for the poor. Eligibility is income-based, and despite being employed by large corporations, many full-time retail and service workers earn below the threshold, particularly in high-cost regions or when supporting families. Medi-Cal offers comprehensive coverage such as medical visits, hospital care, mental health services, and prescriptions. Notably, Costco pharmacies accept Medi-Cal prescriptions, and access to their pharmacy services does not require store membership, highlighting the ongoing reliance of working individuals on public healthcare support due to wage and benefit gaps in the private sector.
Since 2004, U.S. government aid for families just above the poverty line has grown significantly, especially during times of crisis. The Affordable Care Act expanded healthcare subsidies for those earning up to 400% of the poverty level, while programs like SNAP, EITC, and the Child Tax Credit were strengthened during the Great Recession and COVID-19. Pandemic-era relief in 2020–2021, including stimulus checks and boosted tax credits, briefly drove child poverty to a historic low of 5.2% in 2021. Although many of those expansions ended by 2022, ACA subsidies were extended through 2025, and core programs such as Medicaid, CHIP, and school meal assistance continue to support near-poor families earning well above the poverty threshold. Sustaining this progress depends on future policy decisions. The U.S. government assistance for families whose incomes flutter just above the poverty line nearly doubled from 1983 to 2004 after taking inflation into account.
People working in fast-food jobs in the U.S. are significantly more likely to live in or near poverty due to low wages, limited benefits, and part-time schedules. A major study found that 52% of families of front-line fast-food workers—those in nonmanagerial roles working at least 11 hours per week for most of the year—were enrolled in one or more public assistance programs such as Medicaid, SNAP, or the Earned Income Tax Credit. In contrast, only 25% of the overall workforce relied on such programs. This disparity highlights how low-wage employment in the fast-food industry often fails to meet basic living standards, even for full-time workers.
As of 2025, the U.S. federal government operates over 80 welfare programs, including SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, and housing assistance, which support millions of Americans through services ranging from food and healthcare to education and job training. Approximately 72.5 million people—roughly 21–22% of the population—receive some form of assistance in an average month. This includes vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, who make up the majority of recipients. While the number of programs is accurate, the estimated 35% participation rate is higher than the current data suggests.


Did You Know?