Your comment shows a severe lack of knowledge what economics research is all about, please correct me if I'm wrong.
I have two graduate degrees (econometrics) and while I understand and can reason with most of these models I'd argue exactly the opposite. Economics is not a "real science" or rather, it is the science of humans, and we know for sure that humans are fickle and irrational.
Economics is not a hard science yet sometimes is treated as such, and this research is then taken true as gospel (which I argue is wrong). There is a lot of things wrong with economics (I'm a fan of behavioral economics in particular) but "I want to see more data" is a non-argument. You're acting like economists are some armchair scientists waving around wet fingers in the air.
This sort of radical skepticism is generally unhelpful. It is simply not the case that the economics literature, on the whole, conveys no information. It conveys quite a bit, and often correctly answers a myriad of serious, useful, practical political questions. There are certainly edge cases that get a lot of attention upon which the data and consensus are split (e.g. minimum wage disemployment effects), but using those edge cases to disregard the research of an entire field (in favor of what, anyway?) is profoundly misguided.
Economic decisions have to be made by politicians. That is an unavoidable fact. They can either attempt to use the best data available to optimize the values that they care about...or they can just do whatever they feel is best, informed by, what? Their gut? Their down home common sense?
I have two graduate degrees (econometrics) and while I understand and can reason with most of these models I'd argue exactly the opposite. Economics is not a "real science" or rather, it is the science of humans, and we know for sure that humans are fickle and irrational.
Economics is not a hard science yet sometimes is treated as such, and this research is then taken true as gospel (which I argue is wrong). There is a lot of things wrong with economics (I'm a fan of behavioral economics in particular) but "I want to see more data" is a non-argument. You're acting like economists are some armchair scientists waving around wet fingers in the air.