Here’s How Insanely Rich You’d Be If You Bought Apple Stock Instead Of Having Kids

Sorry, ‘80s babies

Credit: Flickr/Paul Inkles

If one new calculator is to be taken seriously (which it isn’t), parents might be kicking themselves for having kids instead of investing in Apple in the 1980s and early ‘90s. Released on Monday, the website What If I Bought Apple Instead helps parents and curious individuals calculate how much money they would have made had they invested their kid’s college fund and living expenses in Apple stock instead.

The calculator works by estimating how much money upper, middle, and lower income families would have spent on children born between January of 1981 and July of 2016. Apple went public in December of 1980 and had a closing price of $109.48 this Monday, so children born during 1981 have the best chance of making their parents the most money—had they not been born, of course.

Source: What If I Bought Apple Instead

To give you an example, an upper-income family making a gross income of more than $111,000 a year (in 2016 dollars) and spending $100,000 on a four-year college education would have made a whopping $41 million had they invested that money in Apple instead. Even lower-income families making less than $64,000 a year and spending $40,000 on four years at a public institution would have made nearly $26 million by fostering a relationship with Apple shares instead of a plaid-wearing, Pearl Jam obsessed teenager.

Source: What If I Bought Apple Instead

Clearly, Apple was the most promising child you could buy in the ‘80s. Fast-forward 30 years, and that’s no longer the case. Let’s say you decided to buy Apple stock in 2012 instead of giving in to biological impulses and social expectations. While it’s still the financially prudent choice, no doubt, as a middle-income family you’d only turn a profit of about $16,000 after investing the approximate $60,000 you would have thrown away on daycare, diapers, iPads, and whatever else babies need these days.

So next time your little angel won’t respond to your texts, tweets, or Facebook messages, mail them a link to this calculator and a bill for $20,000,000 dollars. That should get some sort of message across.

via GOOD / YouTube

Last Friday, millions of people in 150 countries across the globe took to the streets to urge world leaders to enact dramatic solutions to combat climate change.

The Climate Strike was inspired, in part, by Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old girl from Sweden who has captured worldwide attention for her tireless work to hold lawmakers responsible for the climate crisis.

The strike gave people across the planet the opportunity to make their voices heard before the U.N. General Assembly Climate Summit in New York City on Monday.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Julian Meehan

Young leaders from around the world are gathering at the United Nations Headquarters in New York Saturday to address arguably the most urgent issue of our time. The Youth Climate Summit comes on the heels of an international strike spearheaded by Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old climate activist from Sweden, who arrived in New York via emissions-free sailboat earlier this month.

Translated from Swedish, "berg" means "mountain," so it may feel fated that a young woman with Viking blood in her veins and summit in her name would be at the helm. But let's go out on a limb and presume Thunberg, in keeping with most activists, would chafe at the notion of pre-ordained "destiny," and rightly so. Destiny is passive — it happens to you. It's also egomaniacal. Change, on the other hand, is active; you have to fight. And it is humble. "We need to get angry and understand what is at stake," Thunberg declared. "And then we need to transform that anger into action."

This new generation of activists' most pernicious enemy is denial. The people in charge — complacent politicians and corporation heads who grossly benefit from maintaining the status quo — are buffered from real-life consequences of climate change. But millions of people don't share that privilege. For them, climate change isn't an abstract concept, but a daily state of emergency, whether it comes in the form of "prolonged drought in sub-Saharan Africa…devastating tropical storms sweeping across Southeast Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific…[or] heatwaves and wildfires," as Amnesty International reportsare all too real problems people are facing on a regular basis.

RELATED: Greta Thunberg urges people to turn to nature to combat climate change

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Climate Action Tracker

In 2016, 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, pledging to combat climate change by taking action to curb the increase in global temperatures. The Paris Agreement requires countries to report on their emissions and what steps they're taking to implement those plans. Now that the countries are coming together again for the U.N. Climate Action Summit in New York City, it's worth taking a look at what kind of progress they've made.

The Climate Action Trackerkeeps tabs on what each country is doing to limit warming, and if they're meeting their self-set goals. Countries are graded based on whether or not their actions would help limit warming to 1.5 degrees C.

According to a recent article from National Geographic, The Gambia, Morocco, and India are at the head of the class. "Even though carbon emissions in The Gambia, Morocco, and India are expected to rise, they'll fall short of exceeding the 1.5-degree Celsius limit," the article reads. Saudi Arabia, Russia and the United States, on the other hand, get a big fat F. "Projected emissions in Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United States are far greater than what it would take to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius."

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet

September 20th marks the beginning of a pivotal push for the future of our planet. The Global Climate Strike will set the stage for the United Nations Climate Action Summit, where more than 60 nations are expected to build upon their commitment to 2015's Paris Agreement for combating climate change.

Millions of people are expected to take part in an estimated 4,000 events across 130 countries.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet
Ottawa Humane Society / Flickr

The Trump Administration won't be remembered for being kind to animals.

In 2018, it launched a new effort to reinstate cruel hunting practices in Alaska that had been outlawed under Obama. Hunters will be able to shoot hibernating bear cubs, murder wolf and coyote cubs while in their dens, and use dogs to hunt black bears.

Efforts to end animal cruelty by the USDA have been curtailed as well. In 2016, under the Obama Administration, the USDA issued 4,944 animal welfare citations, in two years the numbers dropped to just 1,716.

Keep Reading Show less