You make their argument seem a lot more poignant than it actually is. I'm willing to bet that 90% of those involved in the Occupy Wallstreet movement don't have a clue what they're complaining about. All they are doing is encouraging civil unrest, violence and a general defacement of private property. Last time I checked, those things don't stimulate economies.

And actually, this is exactly the path Germany had taken when the Nazi regime came to be. The only difference is that their people had a right to be angry. Following World War I Germany was in a state of total economic collapse, largely because of the Versailles treaty. The incredible rate of inflation at the time made the Mark worth almost less than the paper it was printed on. When civil unrest rose to a boiling point, the Nazi party swooped in. They promised food to the masses, guaranteed a renewed economy, and preached a message of Aryan superiority. The rest is of course history.

Now obviously it hasn't gotten nearly that bad in America at all. In fact, life is quite livable here in the States. But as Sajeth put it, first world people are spoiled, and it could take a lot less to set us off than it did the people in Germany during the '30s. That said, if the Occupy Wallstreet movement was just a little bit bigger and a little more influential, all we would need is a would-be dictator in sheep's clothing.

Oh yeah, didn't I already mention that the Nazi and Socialist parties already support the Wallstreet movement as well?

EDIT: One more thing: you mentioned that no one ever asks the poor man how to run an economy. That is simply because the poor man doesn't know and doesn't care. All he cares about is his own wellbeing.

As I said already, America was originally set up so that you had to be a person of influence even just to vote. The reasoning behind those restrictions was that the rich man cares a lot more about the economy than the poor man does, since he has a bigger stake in it. Rich people also tend to be more informed.

Now let me be clear: injustice against the poor does exist. It really does, and I'm not arguing otherwise. But to give the reins of government over to the masses is simply not the answer.