I've started to think about this too.
Economics isnt a science, its an orthodoxy of rules and beliefs.
Sure there are some correlations that hit true, but outside a few true-isms, its basically a religion.
Economics isnt a science, its an orthodoxy of rules and beliefs.
Sure there are some correlations that hit true, but outside a few true-isms, its basically a religion.
That means that, as much as they try to stuff it with math, economics remains fundamentally an application of loose sociologic principles, which are themselves extremely debatable.
The genius is that that bit of casual math instantly insulate economists from their peers (i.e. historians, sociologists, etc), no matter how bogus such math might be.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credibility_revolution
[1] https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v110y2020i5p1572-1602.h...
The economic literature abounds in observational studies that test economic theories. What are you basing your statement on?
Economies in video games fascinate me, because it's another 'world' where you can see whether some economics principles apply or not. Eg the game Path of Exile doesn't have 'money', but various crafting materials ended up being treated as money by the players. The exchange rates between them are set by supply and demand as well.
Even game theory sits on top of the throne of "rational actors", meanwhile human beings are explicitly IRRATIONAL actors.
If economics was a functional science, the richest people in the world would be economists. That it isn't is strong evidence that no economics yet has produced strong predictions, which is a rather significant problem for a "science".