What size “nest egg” should my husband and I have, and by what age?
I would focus first on maxing out your RRSPs (or 401k) each year, and once you've done that, try to put another 10% of your income away into unregistered long term growth savings. Let's say you're 30 and you've been doing that since you graduated 7 years ago, and maybe you averaged 8% p.a. return and an average of $50k per year salary (as a round number).  I would say you should have 60k to 120k in straight up investments around age 30.  If that's the case, you're probably well on your way to a very comfortable retirement. There's a bit of working backwards that's required.   This is a summary of a spreadsheet I wrote which helps to get to the answer. What you see here is that at age 25, one might have saved about a half year's salary, assuming they worked 5 years. The numbers grow exponentially to at 65, about 15 years salary saved. This will allow a withdrawal of about 60% final income each year using the 4% guideline. More will come from Social Security in the States to get closer to 100%. The sheet start with assumptions, a 10% per year rate of saving, and an 8% annual return. Salary is assumed to rise 3% per year. One can choose their age, enter their current numbers and their own assumptions. I had to include some numbers and at the time, 8% seemed reasonable. Not so sure today. What I do like is the concept of viewing savings in terms of 'years salary' as this leads to replacement rate. Will $1M be enough for you? Only you can answer that. But the goal of 80-100% replacement income is reasonable and this sheet can be used to understand the goals along the way. (note, the uploaded sheet had 15% saving rate, not the 10 I thought. I used 15 to show a 10% saving along with a 5% match to one's 401(k). Those interested are welcome to enter their own numbers. The one objection I've seen is the increase to salary. Increases tend to be higher in the first 20 than the second, or so I'm told.) For most people, a million dollars is about right. Here's the back of the napkin math that you should consider to find your own estimate: If you take 1 and divide it by 2, that's roughly the size of the nest egg you'll need to live indefinitely. For example, if your retirement investments are earning 5% a year, and you want to live on $50,000 a year, you would need a $1,000,000 nest egg (50,000 / 0.05) Note that you don't have to make any assumptions about how long you'll live. The whole idea of a nest egg is that you live off the interest it earns each year without ever dipping into the principle. It's the gift that keeps on giving! When you die, you can pass it along to children, charities, etc. One more thing to consider is that $1M today is not the same as $1M 30 years from now because of inflation.  Consider that just 30 years ago (1980) the average house price in the US was only about $69K and a new car cost around $7K on average.  When you retire, it isn't much of a stretch to assume that you could be paying $1.5M for a typical house, $100K for mid-grade car, by the time you retire in 30 years.  Of course, over the rest of your working life your salary will likely increase due to inflation too, so that will help. In 1980 the average US income was around $19K/year. So even though that number seems huge, it is because it is denominated in currency that has been devalued significantly. Here's another answer on the topic: Saving for retirement: How much is enough? An angle on it this question made me think of: a good approach here is to focus on savings rate (which you can control) rather than the final number (which you can't, plus it will fluctuate with the markets and make you nervous). For example, focus on saving at least 10% of your income annually (15% is much safer).  If you focus on the final number: The way it works in the real world is that you save as much as you can, but there are lots of random factors and unknowns. Some people end up having to work a lot longer than they hoped to. Others end up able to retire early. Others retire on time but have to spend less than they hoped. But the one thing you can often control (as long as you have an income and no catastrophes, anyway) is that you spend less than you make. There are three numbers that matter in that calculation: 1) How much do you expect per month from in pension/social security/or other retirement programs? 2) At what age will each of you retire? 3) How long will each of you live? 4) What will your annual expenses be when you retire? Unfortunately #3 is the most important of the three and the hardest to know with any certainty.
I suggest rolling it over to the 401(k) with your new employer.  Particularly if they match any percentage of your contribution, it would be in your interest to take as much of that money as possible. When it comes to borrowing money from your 401(k), it looks like the issues AbraCadaver mentioned only apply if you don't pay back the money (http://www.kiplinger.com/article/real-estate/T010-C000-S002-borrowing-from-your-retirement-plan-to-buy-a-home.html).  The reasonable argument against taking money out of your 401(k) to buy a home is that it leaves a dent in your retirement nest egg (and its earning power) during key earning years.  On the plus side for borrowing from your 401(k), it's very low interest--and it's interest you're paying back to yourself over a 5-year period.  At its current value, the most you could borrow from your 401(k) is $35K.  If you're fortunate in where you live, that could be most or all of the downpayment. In my own experience, my wife borrowed against her 401(k) balance for the earnest money when we purchased a new home.  Fortunately for us, an investor snapped up my previous home within 4 days of us listing it, so she was able to pay back her loan in full right away. I'm a woman in her early 30s who has a bachelors degree and a job.  I rent an apartment, own my car and spend within my means because that's what I was taught.  When my sister and now ex-bro-in-law decided to buy a house in the middle of the bubble, despite having no saved money and a child on the way I shook my head at them.  They responded with, 'Real estate only goes up, it's an investment'...I laughed and told them they were fucking stupid to pay $350,000 for an older 2 bedroom house in Phoenix, AZ that was severely overpriced but they said, 'well it's 0 down and the interest rate is like NOTHING!'  Cut to now, the same house is worth MAYBE $110,000 but ya know that great interest rate they got at the beginning wasn't so great when they had to refi so they didn't want to pay their payments for a $110,000 house with a $350,000 loan so they stopped paying their mortgage.  Nothing really happened except some letters were sent and was told that the only way to get a better interest rate was to HAVE to miss a certain number of payments (maybe 6 months) in order to qualify for the loan the Obama admin had created.  At some point that year she decided to get a boob job, tummy tuck and liposuction and her and her husband felt the need to purchase all kinds of new things.  She eventually did qualify for that government help and was totally forgiven for the 6-8 months of payments they missed... so CLEARLY purposely missing payments would have been considered 'very smart' by those same analysts who called what American Airlines did as 'very smart.    So I sit here, with my morals in tact and they sit there like a million other people in this country having their cake and eating it too so I have to wonder WHAT THE FUCK? Was I the stupid one for not following the rest of the asshole idiot sheep and screwing all the people with what I would have thought were basic morals?  It appears so. The question is whether the assessment is in line with surrounding homes. If my 1500 sq ft house on 1/4 acre is assessed far higher than a similar sized house/land nearby, I'd have a case. +/- 10% can be for age/quality, but 25% or more, I'd investigate. mhoran is right, values for different purposes need not align. A start would be to use a service like Zillow which offers property tax information, as well as house sizes. Let us know what you discover. Welcome to Money.SE Something I wanted to posit: Do you have a life insurance policy, either taken out yourself or offered through your company? Many of these policies will pay out prior to the death of the covered individual, given statements by medical professionals that the person has a terminal illness or condition. The benefit, once disbursed, can be used for almost anything, including to pay down a mortgage, cover medical bills and other care expenses, etc. If you have such a policy, I urge you to look into it; that is the money that should be used for your end-of-life care and to ease the burden on your family, not your retirement savings. Your savings, if possible, should be left to continue to compound to provide your wife with a nest egg to retire with. Budget. Figure out how much money you need to keep for your own spending purposes, then figure out from that how much you can afford to move to longer term savings for youeself and/or the kid. Try it for a while, see if it works, adjust how much you can afford to save, repeat. (Actually, you want to further reduce the savings a bit until the emergency fund comes up to a level you feel comfortable at, then increase them to acceptable targets.) It's OK if you miss or reduce some deposits to the savings plans while you get the emergency fund up to a level you're comfortable at. If you don't feel you're saving enough after making these adjustments, you need to economize somewhere so you have more money to save, or make more money, or recalibrate your expectations. You can't get a gallon out of a quart container. "Your goals are excellent. I really admire your thoughts and plans, and I hold you in high esteem. Good credit is indeed an important thing to have, and starting young is THE smart idea with respect to this. I see that you have as a goal the purchase of a home. Indeed, another fine ambition. (Wow, you are a different breed from what I normally encounter on the internet; that's for sure !) Since this won't happen overnight, I would encourage you to think about another option. At this point in your life you have what few people have: options, and you have lots of them. The option I would like to suggest you consider is the debt free life. This does NOT mean life without a credit card, nor does it mean living with ones parents all their days. In its simplest form, it means that you don't owe anybody anything today. An adapted form of that; with the reality of leases and so on, is that you have more immediate cash in the bank than you have contractual responsibilities to pay others. e.g., if the rent on a place is X, and the lease is 12 months, then you don't sign until you have 12X in the bank.  That's the idea. If there is anything good that these past 10 years of recession and financial disasters have provided us as a nation, it is a clear picture presented to our young people that a house is not a guaranteed way to riches. Indeed, I just learned this week of another couple, forced out by foreclosure again. Yes, in the 1970s and 1980s the formula which anyone could follow was to take a mortgage on a single family house; just about any house in any community; and ten years later double your money, while (during those ten years) paying about the same (and in a few years, actually less) amount of money as you would for an apartment with about half the space. Those days were then, not now, and I seriously doubt that I will ever see them again in my lifetime. You might, at your age, one day. In the mean time, I would like to suggest that you think about that word options again; something that you have that I don't. If your mind is made up for certain that a house is the one and only thing you want, okay; this does not apply. During this time of building your credit (we're talking more than a year) I would like to encourage you to look at some of the other options that are out there waiting for you; such as... I also encourage you to take a calculator and a spreadsheet (I would be surprised if there is no freeware out there to do this with a few clicks) and compare the past 30 years of various investments. For example... It is especially educational if you can see line charts, with the ups and downs along the way. One last thing; about the stock market, you have an option (I love that word when people your age are actually thinking) called ""dollar cost averaging"". If you are not aware of this concept, just ask and I will edit this post (although I'm confident it has been explained by others far better than myself on this very site). Hit just about any solid stock market investment (plain old mutual fund, even with a load, and it will still work) and I believe you'll see what I'm trying to get across. Still, yes, you need a roof, and a young person should clearly plan on leaving parents in a healthy and happy way; so again, if the house is the one and only goal, then go for it kid (uhm, ""kid"", if you're still under 18). All the best. Do remember that you will be fixing the pipes, not the maintenance guy." I'm not a 'rule of thumb' guy, but here, I'd suggest that if you can set aside 10% of your income each year for college, that would be great. That turns out to be $900/mo.  In 15 years, if you saw an 8% CAGR, you'd have $311K which happens to be in your range of expenses. And you'd still have time to go as the baby won't graduate for 22(?) years. (Yup, 10% is a good rule of thumb for your income and 3 kids) Now, on the other hand, I'd research what grants you'd be able to get if you came up short. If instead of saving a dime, you funded your own retirement and the spouse's IRA if she's not working, and time the mortgage to pay it off in 15 years from now, the lack of liquid funds actually runs in your favor. But, I'm not an expect on this, just second guessing my own fully funded college account for my daughter. As AskAboutGadgets notes, there's no lower age limit.  You current age (24) is a pretty good one; you'll have four decades or so for your money to grow and compound, allowing it to become a veritable fortune when you're ready to retire if you invest it fairly aggressively.