Indecipherable? No. But I wouldn't listen to Einstein on economics for the same reason I wouldn't listen to him on geography, even though I'm sure he'd be able to do very well in it if he applied himself. Just look at how many Nobel Prize winners completely fuck up when they try going outside of their specialty.
>Rather it became hegemonic and unimaginative and only caters to the status quo.
Funnily, most economists I know are quite dissatisfied with the status quo. And you know, every economics research department on the face of Earth has a cohort of "heterodox" economists, who deal exactly in challenging the status quo. The issue is that most of the time alternative theories happen to produce worse predictions than the mainstream. Paraphrasing something some famous economist once said - people aren't utility maximizers, but they sure do act like utility maximizers when prices shift!
>"Oh, so you think the poor can't take care of themselves? How arrogant!"
I'm just saying, it does get a bit ridiculous when American socialists start telling me and other people from my country what we're supposed to think and feel.
>There's no vast pools of ecologist who's entire salary depends on some derivative to pan out or similar.
Most academic economists' salary depends on exactly the same thing as ecologists, namely science funding. You might have a point when you talk about economists in think tanks and hedge funds and whatnot, but those guys aren't usually the ones producing most academic material.