Pronatalist or trying for a second, growing families should grab this stroller deal now
Nothing shows support for the bid for bigger families like a double stroller.
Far too often, expensive, bulky, and always-in-the-way, a two-seated carriage is not just a vessel for the two-under-two crew. It's also a status symbol, and potentially, a signal of procreation. For some pronatalists or parents planning for a second, the double stroller is considered an essential.
In the current climate, this could be the final chance for growing families to grab a double stroller deal that doesn't drain their 401 Ks. Take this model by Delta Children, for example. Sleek, safe, and under $100, the Jeep Scout is currently at its lowest price in 30 days. Shoppers seem to be stocking up, with hundreds of Amazon sales in this last month alone. But, the chances of that deal sticking around are slim.
Advertisement
It's true, raising a child is not cheap. But, for many, it feels like it's getting more expensive. With the new tariffs on China, manufacturing experts have predicted that strollers, car seats, and other baby essentials could become more expensive and harder to find. Roughly 90% of baby paraphernalia is made in Asia, and the majority in China, per the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association.
Hoping to beat the upcharge, parents are gearing up, urgently buying in bulk, and hunting for the best deals to snag before the surge pricing kicks in and inventory starts dipping.
Fortunately, relief could be near. Earlier this week, the President endorsed $5,000 baby bonuses for new mothers, telling Post reporters that the cash incentive sounded like a 'good idea.'
The President's pronatalist ally, Elon Musk, has also chimed in on the subject of faltering fertility. Musk, a father of fourteen with four women, has stirred controversy over his social media posts on the topic.
'Low birth rates will end civilization,' the tech billionaire warned on X last Tuesday, responding to a post that showed data from the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics on decreasing birth rates.
Wherever you stand, whether you're aiming to push a baby-making policy or just hoping to survive in this economy, now could be the time to double up on your stroller and double down on savings.
Amazon
Politics aside, the Jeep Scout is much than a stroller, it's a statement. Flaunting sixteen wheels for extraordinary balance and swift turning, two UV canopies, generous cup-holders, and more storage than my first New York City studio, it's a practical investment for any parents-of-two. Still slim enough to maneuver tight sidewalks, but spacious enough for two to sit comfortably. You may be tempted to have another baby just to buy one.
Looking for a headline-worthy haul? Keep shopping Post Wanted.
This article was written by Miska Salemann, New York Post Commerce Journalist. As a Gen Z first-time mother of one, Miska tests baby, maternity and postpartum products ranging from stylish new kids clothes to long-trusted diaper brands with her daughter. She evaluates baby- and mom-approved products for practicality and quality, and consults medical and parenting experts to weigh in on safe ingredients, usage and more. Before arriving at the Post, she covered the lifestyle and consumer verticals for the U.S. Sun.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
22 minutes ago
- Fox News
Vance tells Musk to stay 'loyal' to Trump's Republican Party amid third party speculation
Vice President JD Vance cautioned Elon Musk against forming a third political party in an exclusive interview on "The Ingraham Angle," saying the billionaire could wield more influence by staying "loyal" to the Republican Party and President Donald Trump's MAGA movement. "My advice to Elon would be to try to fix the Republican Party. Try to push it in your own way. Disagree with me all you want, disagree with the president of the United States, but don't pretend that you can make a big difference with a third party," Vance said Wednesday. "I think Elon would make a much bigger difference if he stayed loyal to President Trump's Republican Party, and if he had disagreements, express those disagreements from the inside as opposed from the outside." The former Ohio senator's comments came after The Wall Street Journal reported Musk is pausing plans to start the America Party to focus on his companies. Fox News parent Fox Corp. and The Wall Street Journal parent News Corp share common ownership. Musk announced in a post on his social media platform X, formerly Twitter, in July that the America Party would be formed to give people their "freedom" back, amid criticism about the two-party system. "When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste & graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy," he wrote. The former special government employee who served in an advisory role at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) publicly split with Trump earlier in 2025 over his support for Trump's "big, beautiful bill." Musk argued the bill would add trillions to an already ballooning U.S. national debt and could undermine DOGE's work of cutting government spending. Musk's allies, according to the WSJ, said the SpaceX CEO hasn't officially ruled out creating the new party and could change his mind. "I do think that it would be a huge mistake for Elon to go forward with a third party, and my argument to him is whether you like it or not, you are now perceived by the far-Left as on the side of the American Right," Vance told Fox News host Laura Ingraham. "You believe in law and order, you believe in closed borders, you believe in economic growth and prosperity, you believe in making things in the United States of America. The idea that Elon is ever going to go back to being sort of in the middle, where Democrats and Republicans both like him, that's just not going to happen. He is perceived as being on the American Right." The vice president also denied talking to Musk or other donors about a potential 2028 presidential run amid reports that the world's richest man could financially back Vance. Reuters reported that Musk's America PAC spent nearly $300 million during the 2024 election in favor of Trump and other Republican candidates.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tesla shareholder group urges probe, ‘appropriate remedial action' from Nasdaq over Elon Musk's $29 billion pay package
In the latest twist in a long-running battle over Elon Musk's compensation at Tesla, the SOC Investment Group has requested that Nasdaq formally investigate 'and take appropriate remedial action' against Tesla for its recent $29 billion equity grant to the CEO. In a letter to Nasdaq, the group raised concerns about compliance with executive compensation rules and shareholder transparency. The SOC Group, formerly known as the CtW Investment Group, works with pension funds sponsored by a coalition of unions representing over 2 million members; many of those funds are Tesla investors. In a letter dated Aug. 19, 2025, addressed to Erik Wittman, deputy general counsel and head of enforcement at Nasdaq, SOC expressed 'serious concerns' about Musk's new compensation package. Specifically, SOC said it was concerned that Tesla's board circumvented Nasdaq listing rules when awarding Musk a '2025 CEO Interim Award,' disclosed earlier this month. The group claims this equity award should have required a shareholder vote, as stipulated under Nasdaq's rules, given that it materially amended compensation plans. Tesla's board approved Musk's new equity package under the company's 2019 Equity Incentive Plan, largely as compensation for his previously awarded—and overturned—$56 billion options package from 2018, known as the '2018 CEO Performance Award.' That older award was (twice) overturned by the Delaware Chancery Court owing to questions regarding board independence—a decision currently being appealed at the Delaware Supreme Court. Fortune's Shawn Tully reported that the new package will only apply if Musk and Tesla lose on appeal in Delaware. He also noted that unlike with the $56 billion award, the newer $29 billion award includes restrictions that protect shareholders: The shares vest on the second anniversary of the grant, or early August 2027, only if Musk serves for the entire period as CEO or chief of product development or operations. Musk can't sell any of those vested shares until five years later, or on Aug. 3, 2030. Fortune's Amanda Gerut reported that, such restrictions notwithstanding, the package lacks hard performance targets for Musk. Brian Dunn, director of the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University, told Fortune that experts sometimes refer to these as 'fog-the-mirror grants.' In other words: 'If you're around and have enough breath left in you to fog the mirror, you get them.' The objections lobbied by SOC Investment Group in its letter have nothing to do with either feature of the grants. The group argues that the Tesla board dodged shareholder approval for the package, in contravention of Nasdaq listing policy. Tejal Patel, executive director of the SOC Investment Group, told Fortune in an interview that the 'real issue is the fact that the original plan … was pretty clear in the disclosures that the company did not intend to include Elon Musk in that plan.' Acknowledging that such issues are usually raised with the Securities and Exchange Commission, she added: 'Admittedly, this is the first time I've flagged something like this to Nasdaq, [and that's] because it was a very specific listing standard.' Her understanding of the Nasdaq standard is that 'this is exactly what it was designed to avoid.' Shareholders likely 'did not believe' they were voting to approve a new Musk package The SOC Investment Group emphasizes that when Tesla shareholders approved the 2019 Equity Incentive Plan, company disclosures explicitly excluded Musk from eligibility, stating that his compensation would be exclusively tied to the extraordinary 2018 award. 'When shareholders voted on the 2019 Plan it is likely that, based on the available disclosures and research, they did not believe they were voting on an equity plan that would cover compensation to Mr. Musk,' the SOC letter notes, 'precisely because of the 'truly extraordinary' nature of the 2018 CEO Performance Award.' The SOC letter also notes that Tesla's 2019 proxy statement repeated multiple times that the 2019 plan was not intended to cover awards to Musk. Furthermore, the letter mentions that major proxy advisory firms indicated that the 2018 CEO Performance Award was 'intended to be the sole means of compensation for Mr. Musk, relying on the Company's disclosures.' Therefore, SOC writes, the 2025 CEO Interim Award 'appears to expand the class of participants under the 2019 Plan in manner that would be sufficiently material to require a separate shareholder vote.' The letter also warns that Tesla's board has indicated further interim awards could follow, potentially bypassing shareholder votes while the Delaware case, the so-called Tornetta litigation, is pending. The SOC letter urges Nasdaq to act to 'restore 'the rightful balance between shareholder and management's interests,'' prevent dilution, and ensure executive compensation transparency. SOC has 'real concerns over director independence,' Patel told Fortune. 'This is sort of the outcome of having a board that is not independent.' She said her group is concerned with issues over a lack of director independence and the juggling of responsibilities by Elon Musk, and matters have 'come to a head in the last several months.' This timeline overlaps with Musk's brief engagement as a special advisor to the White House, including extensive involvement with the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE. The new compensation plan, if anything, 'was an opportunity for the board to get Musk to focus on Tesla, and instead' they've arrived at this package, she said. She also noted that the conditions under which Musk would receive the same pay, even if he was a chief of product development or operations, is 'pretty unheard-of.' A vocal, active shareholder SOC Investment Group has a long and active history of engagement with Tesla, focusing on issues such as executive compensation, governance, board independence, and labor rights. The group has repeatedly opposed large pay packages for Musk—including leading campaigns to encourage shareholders to vote against Musk's $56 billion option award and calling for votes against related awards, especially when it believed proper shareholder approval procedures were circumvented or governance standards were not met. The group has also urged Tesla shareholders to vote against the reelection of certain directors, such as Kimbal Musk and James Murdoch, citing concerns about lack of board independence from Elon Musk and alignment with shareholders' interests. Similar to its current letter to Nasdaq, it has requested investigations by regulators into Tesla's governance practices, arguing that the company's board favors Musk's interests over those of public shareholders. For example, the group asked the SEC to probe Tesla's plan to shrink its board in 2022. The group has also joined with other investors in co-filing shareholder resolutions calling for Tesla to adopt comprehensive labor rights policies, including noninterference with worker organizing and compliance with global labor standards. SOC has been involved in webinars and resolutions highlighting risks related to Tesla's approach to unions and labor issues across several countries. Tesla has not publicly responded to the letter and did not immediately respond to Fortune's request for comment. For this story, Fortune used generative AI to help with an initial draft. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing. This story was originally featured on Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oracle will reportedly power a giant data center with gas generators
Bloomberg has published a deep dive into operations at Oracle, chronicling the software giant's rise in cloud computing and current push into powering artificial intelligence projects. The publication reported that Oracle has promised to develop tens of billions of dollars in data centers, which have become a hot business. Notably, Oracle landed a deal to back operations at OpenAI, in a partnership that will give the AI company 4.5 gigawatts of computing power. According to Bloomberg, that's enough energy to power "millions of American homes." So far, Oracle has seemed willing to throw money at its AI data center projects, no matter how expensive or irresponsible the needs might be. For instance, a source said the company plans to spend more than $1 billion a year powering a single data center in Texas with gas generators rather than waiting for a utility connection to be built. When completed, this data center is expected to be one of the largest known sites, with computing power of 1.4 gigawatts. In addition to the huge monetary cost, such a project can also have negative human and environmental impact. The Elon Musk-owned xAI is under fire after a supercomputer for its artificial intelligence operations became a primary source of air pollution in Memphis thanks to methane-powered turbines. Other majors, including Google, Microsoft and Meta, have chosen to try nuclear power for their data center projects, which comes with its own potential complications and risks. Purely on the financial side, Oracle's decision to invest so much so quickly meant the company reported its first negative annual cash flow since 1990. Should the current rates of AI investment turn out to be a bubble, it could be very bad news to have many billions of dollars on the line.
