1) I won't bother about tax saving. So much has changed since I bought a product 9 years ago, and so much more will change going forward, all towards taxing of potential gains. The only thing I care about is that I mustn't be taxed while "accumulating" my growth – only when I exit. In that regard, fixed deposits are out.
2) Costs matter. The more you pay for a product, the more it hurts you later. In fact, a product that costs higher in the initial days seems to destroy your compounding potential.
3) Performance matters. …fund performance cannot be taken for granted or assumed, the only thing you must have is the ability to shift out of a badly performing product. With a ULIP you really don't have that freedom – you can't just shift to another ULIP without paying huge upfront costs.
4) Don't mix insurance and investment. The advantage of "insurance" was cursory – it was terribly inadequate with the ULIP in any case.
Some people get terribly attached to cities.
Which is fine if cities were generally nice places. They are not. Most cities are soulless at best, vile at worst. Unless you were actually born in one and lived every moment of your life in it—at which point it becomes home, and "home" usually makes all evil more easy to live with—I fail to see how life in a city is not a compromise of some kind.
You tolerate the small flats for the big money, the terrible commute for the dream job, or the bland friendships for desperate love.
Cities are all about give and take, no?
So I get puzzled by people who are not only attached to cities, but also defend cities in the same way that other people defend—with equal lack of irony—religion…
For me the debate is never about Mumbai versus Delhi versus Kochi versus Doha.
I think the debate is about the city versus me. When it looks like I am no longer winning I pack up and move.
Cities rarely lose. And almost never move.