> Which is also why economics and economists managed to ever make 0 predictions for anything more complicated than the most basic of models, and have failed time and again to predict real world outcomes.

I think present-day economics is at the point where the science of history was at the end of the 19th - the beginning of the 20th century, i.e. most of them still believe that they somehow can predict the future based on past economic events, the same as some historians believed they they could predict our future based on past events from our history. Popper (among others) proved in his "The Poverty of Historicism" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Poverty_of_Historicism) why "scientific prediction" is a futile thing.

What economics tries to bring new to the table is math (or what they consider as math), apparently that should make us laymen believe that what they're doing is more than crystal-ball guessing.