top of page

By:

Sayli Gadakh

11 November 2025 at 2:53:14 pm

Life on EMIs: Convenience or Financial Pressure?

Financial freedom is not about owning everything today; it is about the ability to choose tomorrow. Bharath, a 34-year-old salaried professional in Pune, earns Rs 85,000 a month. On paper, he’s doing well. He owns a 2BHK apartment, drives a decent car, recently upgraded to a premium smartphone, and his home is filled with modern appliances. But by the 25th of every month, his bank balance is close to zero. Where does the money go? A closer look reveals the answer: EMIs. Rs 32,000 for a home...

Life on EMIs: Convenience or Financial Pressure?

Financial freedom is not about owning everything today; it is about the ability to choose tomorrow. Bharath, a 34-year-old salaried professional in Pune, earns Rs 85,000 a month. On paper, he’s doing well. He owns a 2BHK apartment, drives a decent car, recently upgraded to a premium smartphone, and his home is filled with modern appliances. But by the 25th of every month, his bank balance is close to zero. Where does the money go? A closer look reveals the answer: EMIs. Rs 32,000 for a home loan. Rs 11,500 for a car loan. Rs 4,000 for a personal loan taken during a family function. Rs 3,200 for a smartphone on EMI. Add to this a couple of credit card minimum payments, and over 60 per cent of his salary is already committed before he even begins to spend on groceries, fuel, or utilities. Bharath’s story is not unusual; it is the new normal for many middle-class families. Over the last decade, easy access to credit has transformed consumption patterns. With just a few clicks, you can “afford” things that once required years of savings. Zero down payments, no-cost EMIs, and instant approvals—these offers make purchases feel light on the pocket. But what often goes unnoticed is the long-term burden they create. From a chartered accountant’s perspective, the problem is not EMIs themselves. In fact, certain EMIs, like a reasonably planned home loan, can be part of healthy financial planning. The issue arises when EMIs start funding lifestyle rather than assets. There is a fundamental difference between productive and consumption EMIs. A home loan, if within budget, builds an asset. An education loan can enhance earning capacity. These are investments in your future. On the other hand, EMIs for gadgets, vacations, or luxury items often depreciate in value the moment you buy them—yet you continue paying for them long after the excitement fades. This is where many middle-class earners fall into what I call the “EMI illusion". Because the monthly payment looks small, the purchase seems affordable. But affordability should not be judged by whether you can pay the EMI; it should be judged by whether it fits sustainably within your income and goals. A simple rule many financial experts recommend is this: Total EMIs should ideally not exceed 30–40 per cent of your monthly income. Beyond this, your financial flexibility starts shrinking rapidly. In Bharath’s case, crossing the 60 per cent mark has left him vulnerable. One unexpected medical expense or a temporary loss of income could push him into a debt spiral. Another common oversight is committing to EMIs without building an emergency fund. Equally concerning is the role of credit cards. Many individuals treat the “minimum amount due” as a safety net. In reality, it is a costly trap. Interest rates on unpaid credit card balances can go as high as 30–40 per cent annually, silently compounding the burden. So, is an EMI-driven life a convenience or financial pressure? The answer depends on discipline. EMIs can certainly make life convenient. They allow you to access necessities when needed and spread out large expenses. But without boundaries, they quickly turn into financial pressure, restricting your choices, delaying your savings, and increasing stress. For middle-class families aiming for stability, a few practical steps can make a significant difference. Before taking any EMI, ask whether it is a need or a want. Ensure you have at least three to six months of expenses saved before committing to new debt. Avoid taking multiple small EMIs simultaneously, as they add up faster than expected. Prioritise closing high-interest loans, especially credit card dues. Most importantly, focus on building savings and investments alongside repayments. Financial freedom is not about owning everything today; it is about the ability to choose tomorrow. Bharath has now started reassessing his finances. He has postponed further purchases, begun prepaying his high-interest loans, and is working towards creating an emergency fund. The journey may take time, but the direction has changed. And that, perhaps, is the real takeaway. Because in the end, the goal is not just to live a comfortable life but to live one that is financially secure. (The writer is a Chartered Accountant based in Thane. Views personal.)

What if Clive had lost at Plassey?

Updated: Jan 27, 2025

Plassey

History is fickle. Some battles leave scars that fade faster than anticipated; others cast shadows long before anyone realizes their magnitude. The Third Battle of Panipat in 1761, where Ahmad Shah Abdali crushed the Marathas, seems to be a colossal turning point in Indian history, but is not. For within a decade, the Marathas, under the indomitable Mahadji Scindia, reclaimed much of their power. In contrast, the Battle of Plassey in 1757 seemed, at first glance, inconsequential. Casualties were minimal, and it passed without the immediate fanfare of a historic reckoning. Yet, over time, Plassey emerged as a defining moment - not just for India, but for the world.


But what if history had taken a different turn? Counterfactual musings about Plassey unravel a labyrinth of possibilities. Bengal’s Nawab Siraj-ud-Daulah had allied with the French, aiming to thwart the East India Company’s growing influence. His undoing was not British military genius but treachery - Mir Jafar, his commander-in-chief, defected, handing Robert Clive an improbable victory. Had Mir Jafar stayed loyal, Siraj’s forces might have triumphed, the British probably expelled and India’s history rewritten.


In this alternate timeline, Bengal’s fate diverges sharply. A Franco-Bengali alliance, buoyed by Bengal’s vast wealth, would have stymied British expansion. The East India Company, stripped of its lucrative foothold, might have retreated to Bombay and Madras, curtailing its imperial ambitions. Europe’s balance of power, and by extension global imperialism, would have looked starkly different.


The political implications are equally tantalizing. Without a unified British Raj, India’s future might have mirrored Europe’s - a mosaic of sovereign states locked in alliances and rivalries. The Marathas, Sikhs and Mysore might have risen as dominant regional powers leading to the emergence of a multipolar subcontinent.


In reality, Siraj-ud-daulah was hardly an enlightened ruler, utterly despised for his erratic governance and cruelty. Even without British intervention, Bengal’s fractious nobility would anyway have sought to unseat Siraj. The French lacked the resources to dominate the subcontinent. Their failure to consolidate power in Pondicherry suggests that a Franco-Bengali regime would have struggled to sustain itself against internal dissent and external threats.


Interestingly, for several eminent Bengalis like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, India’s foremost historian, Plassey was a deliverance, not a calamity. Writing in the second volume of The History of Bengal (1948), Sarkar lauded the British victory: “In June 1757, we crossed the frontier and entered into a great new world.” Bengal under British stewardship experienced a Renaissance after Muslim—a cultural, intellectual, and social awakening broader than Europe’s post-Constantinople revival, Sarkar argued, remarking that the British had rescued Bengal from the “blight of medieval theocratic rule,” transforming a neglected corner of the subcontinent into a vanguard for India’s modernization.


Closer to home, Siraj’s victory would have had profound ripple effects. Without British consolidation in Bengal, the ‘Bengal Renaissance’ – the flowering of intellectual, artistic and social reform movements might never have materialized and reformers like Raja Ram Mohun Roy and Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar might have remained obscured in a landscape untouched by Enlightenment ideals. Bengal, rather than becoming a pathfinder for India’s modernization, could have languished under fragmented, medieval rule.


Plassey, as it happened, marked a watershed. It transformed the East India Company from a trading enterprise into a political empire-builder. Bengal’s fertile lands and lucrative trade networks became the financial bedrock for Britain’s expansion. Had Clive been defeated, this imperial enterprise might have been delayed or derailed altogether.


Plassey’s significance lies not just in what happened but in what might have been. For Bengal, it was the beginning of a transformation—a Renaissance borne of conquest. For the world, it was the dawn of an empire whose shadow still looms large.

Comments


bottom of page