That's not true at all -- the police can't simply go around arresting everyone they don't like the looks of and justify it by saying, "what's the big deal, if they're innocent, the courts will clear them." By law, everyone is presumed innocent unless there is evidence to the contrary. Even for a two-minute stop, a cop is the one who has the burden of demonstrating there was some good reason for that stop, whereas for you to sue the cop for harassment and abuse of authority, you don't have to demonstrate any lack of suspicious activity at all. If the cops are unable to provide a reasonable justification for the stop, you would win the case.

That's not to say that such "reasonable suspicion" cannot be based on an honest misunderstanding on the cop's part, i.e., the stop doesn't have to ultimately lead to a conviction for it to have been reasonable.

Getting back to the topic at hand, having a lot of money is not in and of itself indicative of a crime. I remember when I was about 16, I was standing on a corner, talking to a girl with a dark green bottle in my hand. There was a stop sign at the corner, and a cop pulled up and said, "let me see the bottle". The label (which said "ginger ale") was facing away from him. I just looked at him. He repeated his "request" (which was starting to sound more like a demand to me). I said "no", and he got out, grabbed the bottle, looked at the label, sniffed it and handed it back to me, then got back in his police-mobile and drove off. At 16, I let it go. Now, I would sue. It's the same thing -- seeing a guy on the street with a bottle in his hand is not in and of itself suspicious enough to warrant a stop. Seeing a guy weaving down the sidewalk with a bottle in his hand singing "where have all the good times gone?" off-key at the top of his lungs probably does.