The list of things we don't need is ever-expanding

First, it was Glocks.  Now?  Hundred dollar bills.  From the link:

Thirty-four years of inflation make Henry's inclusion of $50 bills seem perhaps overzealous, but, otherwise, his argument has become more compelling, not less. Technological change has reduced much further the plausible need of any law-abiding American to carry a C-note in his wallet or to stash a pile of C-notes in his mattress. Demand for $100 and $50 bills is "so weak," observes David Gorman, author of the 2007 book, Cashless Money, "that banks do not stock [them] in their ATMs." Flash a $100 at the typical American retailer and you're liable to inspire befuddlement on par with that described in Mark Twain's short story "The Million-Pound Banknote." (You probably won't enjoy the same pleasant fate enjoyed by Twain's hero, who, because no one can break his note, never has to pay for anything again.)

(As always, emphasis is mine.)

I am somewhat amused by the fact that similar rhetoric is used to argue against Franklins as against guns.  You only need hundred dollar bills or pistols if you're going to do something shameful.  Like buy drugs.  Or, you know, college textbooks.

To quote JayG: The stupid, it burns.