Khalilah Dato' Mohd Talha's reflection, Was Prophet Yusuf the World's First Economist? , is more than an interesting observation about a Qur'anic story. It raises a question that modern economics may have become uncomfortable answering: What is an economy actually for? Prophet Yusuf's economic wisdom was remarkably simple. When abundance was forecast, he did not ask how much could be consumed, how quickly wealth could be accumulated or how much return could be extracted. He asked how today's abundance could be preserved so that people could survive tomorrow's scarcity. Somewhere along the evolution of modern capitalism, that priority appears to have been reversed. In the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and the Christian Bible, Prophet Yusuf in the Qur'an is the same figure known as Joseph. 

  The theme of The Edge HSBC Pre Budget 2027 Roundtable discussion was the challenges to the fiscal consolidation coming from external uncertainties. Read HERE .   After the display of power, defiance and political legitimacy from the three appearances together at the UN General Assembly — US President Donald Trump on September 22, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on September 23, and Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on September 24, 2026, followed by a mass walkout by 73 countries representatives, one would not have expected market to react as it did last night. Following the UN General Assembly spectacle to project an image of political strength and certainty, the oil market told a different story. 

When politics threatens to overshadow the budget In a recent episode of Keluar Sekejap , Khairy Jamaluddin raised an intriguing possibility: if there were to be a “hacking from the rooftop”, it could conceivably come through the proposed Budget 2027 failing to secure passage in Parliament. It was a passing observation, rather than the subject of the programme. Yet it raises a question that deserves serious consideration. If a national budget were to become a casualty of political manoeuvring, it would be deeply unfortunate. Parliament should scrutinise, challenge and improve a Budget. That is its constitutional role. But deliberately preventing a government from having an approved financial plan would be a very different matter. It would suggest that politics is beginning to lose sight of its fundamental purpose — to administer the country responsibly — and becoming increasingly preoccupied with the pursuit of power. That is precisely what Malaysia can least afford as Budget 2027 appro...

The emergence of Mark Carney as Canada's Prime Minister raises a question that Malaysia should perhaps ask itself: does a country facing increasingly complex economic and geopolitical challenges need a different kind of political leadership? Carney is unusual because politics was not the foundation of his career. Before entering electoral politics, he had already accumulated decades of experience in banking, finance and public institutions. He served as Governor of the Bank of Canada and subsequently Governor of the Bank of England.  He entered politics carrying with him experience in managing financial crises, international institutions and economic uncertainty. That background is now evident in the way he is dealing with Donald Trump. Rather than responding to Trump's pressure simply through political rhetoric, Carney has sought to reduce Canada's vulnerability to dependence on the United States. Canada is looking towards Europe, Asia and other markets while strengthening...

There has been much talk about taking Budget 2027 to the ground, listening to different groups and understanding their concerns before the Budget is finalised. I welcome the sentiment, although consultation with industry, businesses and the public before a Budget is hardly a new practice. Governments have always needed to hear from those who will ultimately be affected by their policies. What interests me more is what we hear when the Budget is finally delivered. Budget speeches are inevitably filled with economic terminology. Fiscal consolidation. Productivity. Competitiveness. Targeted subsidies. Structural reform. High-value investment. Human capital. All are important. But most Malaysians are not economists.  A family is more likely to think about the grocery bill, petrol, rent, school expenses and medical costs. A young graduate is thinking about getting a decent first job. A small trader is thinking about whether there will be enough customers next month. An SME is thinking a...

The national debt is approaching RM1.4 trillion. Yes, it is large. Yes, it deserves scrutiny.  But Malaysia needs something more useful than another round of political arithmetic over which Prime Minister accumulated more debt. Early this year, the Prime Minister's remark that there would be no new borrowing has been seized upon by his critics as evidence of another broken promise. It may well have been an unfortunate slip of the tongue, particularly when made in the heat of a political rally.  But it should not become a substitute for discussing the much more important question: What is Malaysia actually doing about its debt trajectory?

  There is a curious contradiction in Malaysian politics today. A Merdeka Center survey put Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's approval rating at 52 per cent — still relatively respectable and the highest among the political leaders tested.  Yet Pakatan Harapan does not look like a popular political force. Its performance in recent state elections and by-elections has been disappointing, and there is already widespread speculation that PH could face another difficult contest in Melaka. So how can a Prime Minister remain relatively popular while the coalition behind him appears increasingly vulnerable?