In other pages, I went over how someone of modest means could provide stepping stones for their kids; $10/day for 5 years before having a kid can mean that kids first car, help with college, down payment on a home and ultimately provide for their retirement. Anyone can put a billion dollar business together over a 5 year period, but it takes luck and talent. If your name is Kardashian, you can put your name on lipstick and it only takes a little more luck (beyond having the name Kardashian) for it to have a massive valuation. But, without luck or talent beyond the norm; it usually takes time. People either have kids because they like kids or because they want to pass on their name and positive traits (or generically the human race.) Personally, I'd want to provide that kid with resources and a duty to their kids to provide further resources; I'd also encourage mentoring people and if able providing resources. In another page I described a 20 year old with $1 million in S&P 500 who borrows a middle class income of $40k a year and increases that at 3% annually to keep up with inflation, reinvesting dividends; in 40 years they're 60 (still young enough to enjoy it) and have $76 million (based on the last 40 years of S&P 500 growth when factoring in dividend reinvestment.)
To clarify, a person earning $50k at a job has job expenses (car, gas, work clothes, dining out), taxes (federal, social security, medicare, possibly state though I wouldn't reside in a state that has state income tax) and retirement costs (you can still put money for retirement, but the million example covers it well) you don't have those expenses in this scenario unless you want them. Also, you don't need student loans to do this either. You can go to college if you want, but the degree required for a job isn't required to own S&P 500. Of course, you have to get it first! My example was a parent putting up $190k when their child is born and it grows to $1 million by 20.
If you're not rich, you'd need to put $1000 a month for 10 years for that kidbefore having them; if you're 18 and living with your parents then perhaps getting a job as a realtor and putting aside $1000 a month for 10 years means having a kid and that kid will be rich. You could control that account and say the kid gets disbursements as long as they lead a good life (don't do drugs, don't drink to excess; parenting is complex and beyond the scope of this article.)
If one person sacrificed for their family in a logical manner: person 1 is effectively a trustfund kid as soon as they hit 20. Perhaps they have guidelines like: you can travel, go to college, start a business, raise a family, if you work at a job then do a job you love. The challenge is you'd like to offer a plan that allows a person to put $190k into each kid and have 3 in a row, that kid who got $190k at birth and has $1 million at 20 would be 44 by the time dividends can cover this annually (their $40k annual withdrawal would be $81k by then.) To cut time down, someone contributing $2600 a month could get the amount to reach $190k down to 5 years.
Then, there's inflation. Part of the reason companies go up at a fast rate despite already being big companies is inflation. This makes it more predictable, but also; it's a race to the bottom. In another section, I described how inflation can be mitigated by having employer sponsored health insurance and own your own home (preferably in a fixed low interest rate loan.) If you buy a banana for 25 cents in 2000 and that same banana is 75 cents in 2026, that cost still won't affect your standard of living even when quantified to all expenses because groceries aren't that expensive. Gas was getting cheaper, then the Iran situation happened and gas is suddenly over $4 a gallon; this cost hurts the employee much more than it hurts the independently wealthy (they aren't forced to drive wherever the job is and they have plenty of money rather than a job that pays just enough that they don't quit.)
A million is a nice round number, and in 20 years that might be a bit light; if someone has enough that they can invest more in their kid I assume they will. Let's assume the hypothetical person is 20 and has that million. They wind up working in a job they love and start putting away $2500/mo and at 25 have a kid and give them this starting fund, at 30 again and at 35 again. Now they're able to start borrowing against their fund (they didn't need to as they had a job they loved, if they did then they started at $40k and grew it at 3% annually) and start at $160k. They can work or not, still affording to raise their kids well. At 55, those kids have all started taking their income as desired: if they want to have kids they'd need to put away twice as much. The good thing is the parent had this same trust and when those 3 kids are 25-35 their parent will be worth nearly $70 million (assuming the next 40 years equal the last 40 years of S&P performance). If people want kids, they'll probably be among the 'working rich' rather than 'never have to work.'
If the parent isn't so rich they can do this and expect nothing in return, they'll probably just make it an account (maybe a trust) that the kids inherit but he might let them have controlled access to it under certain circumstances. The rule of survival is make sure you can survive before helping others, works for oxygen masks just as well as finances.
If you're a rich older person with no kids (or more money than you want to leave your kids) you could invest into bright young people, this could be 'no strings attached' or people you mentor or give support to people who want to go into a specific field. There's all sorts of ways to help out. I'd say 'no drugs' for example, if someone accepts the money but becomes a drug addict; the money should be cut off and they go to rehab (even if the money covers the rehab.) It's unfortunate, some people have resources and do stupid things either to get their parents attention or out of boredom; these conditions should be avoided.
This assumes no other investing, my investing thesis is that the industry leader of the fastest growing industry as long as they meed certain criteria (size, revenue growth rate, all covered elsewhere) and I suspect that would outperform S&P investing long term (but I wanted a simple replicatable method that's not assuming everyone can evaluate an investment) and people buy houses which appreciate and cost money but cost less after being paid off. If someone has both a job and such a fund, they might put money into retirement plans; Roth IRA's are ideal for my investment strategy (if every year someone put $23000 into low fee S&P index funds in 401k and $7000 into Roth IRA 7 stocks that fit my investment thesis criteria each investing $1000 each; I'd like to see if the Roth IRA total grows to a larger amount.) The goal being each person living a comfortable middle class life without having to work and still winding up very rich when they start getting a bit older (60 isn't old, with advances in modern science; it may be younger than it is today) and to create this family tradition of wealth.
If someone has this and has 3 kids, those 3 kids have 3, those 9 have 3, those 27 have 3; a 20 year old today in 85 years they may be gone but there will be about 120 rich people who can thank them.