As per previous post, the laws of supply and demand do not apply to the monopolist. If an individual within a specific competitive market attempts to move against the equilibrium price as indicated by the laws of supply and demand, they will loose business to the competition. True, except as previously stated, the laws of supply and demand do not apply to monopolists. Agreed. And if individual participants choose to deviate or act in an irrational manner, they will suffer a resulting economic loss which will ultimately become unsustainable. As previously mentioned, when using econometric models to predict the future there are two significant problems faced by economics and any science that studies large complex systems (e.g. geology, astronomy, astrophysics, etc.) 1) Exogenous events 2) Insufficient data So if you say economics is not a science because practical models used to predict future events don't always accurately predict events, then you are basically saying all science is bunk. Isn't that what science is all about - trying to model and explain real world observation? Economics is no more conjectural than string theory and probably even less so. Because in economics we have centuries of data, we can see what happened to economies under various conditions and draw some conclusions. Quantum mechanics may be good at making predictions, but ultimately one day it may be scraped for a more compelling theory. And if you are saying that Quantum mechanics is without controversy, you are wrong. Additionally economics is a big field. As with any science, you will find a core of knowledge that is little challenged but as you get to the fringe, the leading edge, issues become more controversial. But again that does not mean economics is not a science. Nor does it mean that it is all bunk. There is always a risk in any science that until a theory becomes a law the theory may be broken. And that includes quantum mechanics. I think you have just validated my previous comments. Did the Fed and Fannie Mae know about the fraudulent misrepresentation of MBO's? Did any of those economists factor into their models the fraud, lax SEC, and derivative trading? No. As with all complex systems, you cannot model: 1) exogenous events 2) insufficient data caused by the need to make predictions before that data becomes available. I agree with you about trusting economists from investment banks or brokerages. They should not be trusted as they are paid to sell an agenda. But then no one from from those businesses should be trusted. I would also add, that one should be very skeptical of the talking heads one sees on TV. A lot of those business folks are talking their books (selling an action that will benefit the speaker at the expense of the listener) rather than giving an honest opinion or recommendation. But again, in the final analysis, this is not relevant to the question posed in this thread. Scientists are frequently purchased to advance a certain cause be it political, legal (tort or criminal hearings) or commercial.