Yet still a far cry from actually representing the 99%.

99% of what, exactly? Furthermore, if 80% of a population has characteristic X, then interviewing those with characteristic X will yield patterns that would hold, all other things being equal, for 99% of said population as well -- to within specific limits. (That's what the whole notion of "statistically relevant sampling sizes" are about.)

No, you're not. You're generalizing from the hundred or so pictures you saw on a single website that's only tangentially related to the movement. Hence, availability bias.

Who said anything about it being from a single website? Who said the submitters were the ones with the computers?

Furthermore: As I just explicitly stated, by "99%" I refer *solely to those who self-apellate in this manner.

Even, thusly, if we somehow allow for an "availability bias", the simple fact of the matter is that said bias simply isn't sufficient to the task of overcoming the fact that I have taken a statistically relevant sampling size of the protestors who self-apellate as "99%", and found that the overwhelming majority of them exhibit seriously poor economic planning abilities in various ways. (Not a single description on a single sign showed good planning done in by external forces. Not one. Out of one hundred. Of a movement numbered less than one hundred thousand individuals.)

I'm sorry, but you'll just have to provide better, sounder, reasoning if you expect my beliefs on this matter to be revised in the direction you appear to insist.