Couple of things:
$150-175 should get you eight to 10 megapixels. To compare, 35mm film converts at roughly 20-25, but that level of resolution would make for massive, hard-drive-eating file sizes. As long as you're not planning on poster-size prints, 8-10 will be just fine.
When looking at zooms, you want the one with the better optical -- as opposed to digital -- zoom. My current digicam, a four-year-old Kodak Z700, has a 5x optical zoom which allegedly gives me the equivalent of a 35-175mm lens. I wouldn't dream of shooting sports with it, but it's more than adequate for everyday use. Digital zooms tend to get grainy in a hurry.
I went with a Kodak this time for two reasons: I liked the features it gave me at a reasonable price, and I was pissed at Canon, my normal brand of choice.
(San Antonio, October 2005: Shortly before heading to the Alamo with friends, I pull my two-month-old Powershot out of its case, turn it on to check the battery ... and get something that looks like the infamous Windows Blue Screen of Death. Turns out, it's even worse. Check http://www.e18error.com for more info on that. Dunno, maybe they've gotten past that problem by now -- but the Kodak has made two cross-country flights in my luggage without complaint, so I'll stick with it.)
I can't guarantee this, but I have to assume that just about anything priced over $100 will come with a USB cable. I wouldn't buy one without it; beats messing with a card reader. The cards do come in handy if you'd rather have your photos printed somewhere than do it yourself, though.
Of course, you'll want to double-check compatibility with a Mac before you buy. (Surprised me to discover that my digital recorder is PC-only.) Another reason to like my Kodak: you go through batteries pretty quick, and this one uses AAs instead of something proprietary. I always carry an extra set of rechargeables with me when I'm using it, same for the recorder.
Those are my own thoughts, but there's already a ton of good advice upthread.
And, by the by, there's absolutely nothing wrong with admiring the work of HST.