I'm not sure what research you can show that everyone except the upper class is irrelevant, but feel free to try.
A study from Princeton, for starters
Yes, that was quite a while ago,
Did economics just start being used by the US government?
I said the military doesn't use psychics.
Regardless, it's telling that this very article points out how rarely police use psychics, and how studies have been able to demonstrate that psychics are ineffective
Yep and yet they're still being used. The point is that even in the face of a lack of results and scientific research which demonstrations that they are bogus, even government officials will continue to pay them.
There hasn't been any sort of empirical debunking of economic work in general.
I am starting to get the impression you don't know what I am aruging.
I never argued that.
You argued it had a sufficient grasp of human nature based on the fact that it produces policy changes.
is not as important as the results.
Yes, it is completely important. If economics is based on nothing but a shallow abstraction of human behavior then literally billions of people are living their lives according to premises which aren't necessarily accurate.
Okay? And other times they're not. The point still stands.
Only in your mind. Previously you've dismissed my overall stance on the grounds that you didn't think I was a clear observer. Yet the fact that I can offer a clear incentive for them to be dishonest when you say none exists demonstrates your own lack of clarity. Are there circumstances where economists have no incentive to be biased? Of course. But your entire position has been nothing but one brought statement after another. Its not just a demonstration of inaccuracy but a larger bias on your part.