The Warning Beyond NEET

The Jantar Mantar protests exposed the widening gap between education, employment and growth. The month-long protest at Delhi's Jantar Mantar may have formally ended, but the political and economic questions it raised will linger. Triggered by the NEET paper leak, the movement became a major expression of youth discontent. What began as a demand for a fair examination system became a broader indictment of an economic model that promises opportunity but increasingly fails to deliver...

min read

The Jantar Mantar protests exposed the widening gap between education, employment and growth. The month-long protest at Delhi's Jantar Mantar may have formally ended, but the political and economic questions it raised will linger. Triggered by the NEET paper leak, the movement became a major expression of youth discontent. What began as a demand for a fair examination system became a broader indictment of an economic model that promises opportunity but increasingly fails to deliver employment. The government initially treated the protests as a law-and-order issue. That changed when the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), the ideological fountainhead of the ruling establishment, publicly criticised police action and expressed solidarity with the students. The subsequent resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, withdrawal of criminal cases and RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat's endorsement of the integrity and aspirations of India's Gen Z transformed the political narrative. The issue had moved beyond examination reform to whether India's development model is serving its young citizens. The NEET paper leak was merely the spark. The fuel had accumulated through rising educated unemployment, declining confidence in public institutions and growing frustration among millions of young Indians. Education is increasingly seen as an uncertain investment rather than a guaranteed pathway to opportunity. Every examination scandal reinforces the perception that merit alone is insufficient, while recruitment delays deepen the belief that the system is failing those who have done everything expected of them. India has celebrated its demographic dividend for nearly two decades, projecting its young workforce as its greatest competitive advantage. But demographic dividends are never automatic. They generate prosperity only when education is matched by employment, productivity and rising incomes. Otherwise, they become demographic liabilities that breed frustration rather than growth. The evidence suggests India is approaching that inflection point. GDP has expanded impressively over the past two decades, yet employment has failed to keep pace. Employment elasticity has weakened sharply. During the 1980s, every percentage point of GDP growth generated roughly half a percentage point increase in employment. Today the ratio is estimated at about 0.16, among the lowest for major emerging economies. Growth continues; jobs do not. This disconnect reflects India's growth strategy. Public policy has increasingly favoured capital-intensive industries through subsidies, tax incentives and investment support. Such sectors contribute to output and productivity but generate relatively fewer jobs. Agriculture continues to suffer from incomplete reforms and low productivity. Manufacturing has not expanded fast enough to absorb new workers, while artificial intelligence and automation are reducing opportunities in occupations once regarded as gateways to middle-class prosperity. India thus faces a paradox: it is producing more graduates while creating fewer opportunities to absorb them. The comparison with Asia is instructive. Vietnam and Bangladesh have pursued manufacturing-led growth that has generated substantially higher employment relative to economic expansion. Vietnam's employment-to-population ratio is estimated at nearly three-fourths, compared with about one-half in India. Vietnam has also moved into the upper-middle-income category, while India remains a lower-middle-income economy. These comparisons do not diminish India's achievements. They highlight the urgency of correcting structural weaknesses before they become politically destabilising. History demonstrates the risks of prolonged youth unemployment. The Arab Spring showed how educated but unemployed youth can transform political landscapes. More recently, political instability in Bangladesh and Nepal has reflected frustration among younger populations facing shrinking opportunities. India's democratic institutions are stronger, and its circumstances are different. Yet no democracy can indefinitely ignore the aspirations of its largest demographic group. The significance of Jantar Mantar lies here. India's Gen Z is organised, digitally connected and politically conscious. Social media transformed local grievances into a national movement within days, while traditional political parties largely responded after the sentiment had acquired independent momentum. The RSS intervention further complicated the government's challenge. Once protesting students found resonance within the ideological ecosystem closest to the ruling establishment, the issue ceased to be a partisan confrontation. It became an internal warning that India's youth expect credible institutions, transparent examinations and, above all, meaningful employment. The Centre's examination reforms are necessary but insufficient. Restoring the credibility of competitive examinations addresses only one symptom. The larger challenge is to redesign India's growth strategy around employment. Labour-intensive manufacturing, support for small and medium enterprises, investment in skills, higher-education reform and greater attention to employment outcomes must become central to economic planning. The Jantar Mantar agitation should not be remembered simply as the NEET protests. It marked a moment when India's youngest generation questioned the assumptions underlying the country's development model. Governments can manage protests and reform examinations. But unless economic growth translates into broad-based employment, similar movements will return. India's demographic dividend remains its greatest opportunity. It could equally become its greatest challenge. The warning has been delivered. The question is whether policymakers are prepared to listen.

Why Women Are Better Investors Than Men

Kaustubh Kale
Mar 9, 2025
2 min read

Updated: Mar 10, 2025

As the world celebrated International Women's Day, discussions centered around women's achievements in various fields—business, leadership, science, and beyond. But one area where women consistently outperform men, yet receive little recognition, is investing.

Despite money management often being seen as a male-dominated field, women have quietly and consistently proven to be better investors than men. With patience, discipline, and a long-term mindset, women naturally possess qualities that make them superior money managers.

A Perfect Blend of Knowledge and Wealth

In Hindu mythology, Goddess Saraswati symbolizes knowledge, while Goddess Lakshmi represents wealth—two essential pillars of investing. The ability to manage wealth wisely stems from a deep understanding of financial principles, and this is where women excel. They take the time to learn, analyze, and make informed investment decisions rather than rushing into trends or speculation.

Why Women Make Better Investors

Several traits make women stand out as investors:

Patience and Long-Term Vision: Unlike men, who may be more prone to impulsive trading and get-rich-quick schemes, women tend to have a longer term mindset. Their ability to stay calm, especially during market fluctuations, leads to better returns over time.

Disciplined and Goal-Based: Women prioritize consistent savings and goal-based investing. This disciplined approach helps them build wealth steadily. Women naturally excel at budgeting, planning, and structuring investments to align with future goals, whether it’s children’s education, home buying, or retirement security. Their emotional connection with goals is what makes them stick to discipline.

Risk-Aware, Not Risk-Averse: Contrary to the stereotype, women are not afraid of risks—they are just more calculated about them, through appropriate asset allocation. Eventually, this approach ensures maximum returns with minimal risks.

Trust and Willingness to Learn: Women value education and expertise, making them more likely to seek guidance from a well-qualified financial advisor. Unlike men, who often overestimate their investing abilities, women approach financial decisions with a willingness to learn. Once they find a trusted expert, they follow sound advice instead of making emotional, short-term moves.

Women Leading the Financial World

These qualities are why many of the world’s leading financial institutions are now led by women. In India and abroad, we see prominent banks, asset management companies, and investment firms thriving under female leadership. Their ability to combine strategic thinking with emotional intelligence makes them exceptional at managing money—both at a personal and professional level.

Final Thoughts

With their trust in expert advice and a strong focus on financial education, more women should embrace their strengths and take control of their financial futures!