http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_slicing

The concept of money is a kind of fiction -- a shared, collective illusion in which we all participate. Which is by no means to suggest it's not worth something -- it's worth exactly what our economy says it's worth. But are you advocating a return to the gold standard?? You probably want to think long and hard about that. Does it make sense that a country should tie the size of its economy to the arbitrary physical amount of a precious metal which can be found within its borders?

Have a read/listen, be enlightened. Why we left the gold standard.

We would like to keep down the cost of producing coins, certainly. But it's a bit of a fallacy to say that the coin cannot be composed of materials & processes which cost more than its face value to be manufactured. The coin will quite possibly be in circulation for decades, and it will certainly do more than [face value] cents of "work".

On the other hand, we certainly do want to do our part to remove incentives of criminals to destroy currency in order to recycle & sell the raw materials from which they were made (picture zinc ingots).

I'm talking about crystal methamphetamines. The stuff that rots your teeth, makes you hallucinate bugs under your skin, and so on. It's not a "party drug" like cocaine, nor is it a "mellow" thing like weed. Do you think the "faces of meth" theme seen in law-enforcement slideshows across the country is simply propaganda? My sister is a nurse in OR and sees more than her fair share of meth-head tweakers.

I've heard these arguments before, but ultimately not all drugs can be treated the same. Do you think your "legalize and tax" method would fix the problems that originate with meth? By all accounts, this is a drug which, once you've tried it, you're on a one-way road, downhill, no brakes.

How many of those behaviors are capable of having a potentially deadly outcome of the doctors other patients while this smoking-drinking-fried foods guy sits in the waiting room?

I suppose you're right. And I don't know much about such things, but at various landfill sites I've seen this methane being burned off -- a big 'ol stack with a big flame, just like a monster-sized candle. What is it about the methane coming from landfill sites which prevents it being used for generating electricity? Politics or science?

Actually, my other reason is, "I should get around to spending the Best Buy gift card my (boss|mother|sister-in-law|whoever) gave me."

I wish that the phrase "material science" had been around (or more discussed?) when I was younger. This kind of thing really is amazing. I'd also seen a NOVA program in which an anti-microbial surface was created with a diamond-shaped pattern of ridges based on other things in nature (someone has seen this and can give more detail).

If I were starting much younger, I'd love to study material science. Truly amazing -- in the case of the anti-microbial surface (vs the control) they were made of the exact same material, but the shapes dramatically hindered colony growth.

Exactly what I was thinking... but then again, BiggerDog is so much better, because its manufacture would employ hundreds, which is good, because when one is destroyed on the battlefield, replacement cost is likely in the six-figure range. How else would we prop up the military industrial complex?