Economics Isn't Science - "Economics Is Harder Than Physics" Edition

So, while Higgs and Englert got the Nobel prize in physics after the biggest machine we have ever built had produced conclusive evidence that proved them right, the "Nobel prize" in economics went to both Shiller and Fama and additionally Hansen, one of whom has been conclusively proven wrong by the biggest disaster of our time. (Yves Smith posted an excerpt of her book concerning Fama which I completely agree with)

Reading what people had to say about two contradicting ideas) both getting the same price at the same time, I came across this gem, by Justin Fox. It started out great, but seemed to completely collapse in the second paragraph.

He claimed:

This is, to a certain extent, further evidence that economics isn’t a science like physics is a science [..]. But that’s not because economists are all frauds — it’s at least partly because economics is harder than physics.

Wait what? I completely agree with the first part, but the second part is, well, interesting. I would have at least expected some kind of explanation, but non is given. The rest of the post is actually a good read, but that is a pretty big claim. Let me try to explain why economics is in some respects harder than physics and why some economists are still frauds (but often not intentionally).

On Productivity, Diversification And Engineering - Or Why Engineering Jobs Might Be Endangered By Machines

Many economists seem to believe that productivity increases come from the automation of jobs "in the middle", which has led to both a higher demand for low and high skilled labor. For example, David H. Autor and David Dorn recently wrote an article in the NYT, which is based on that believe. They argue that people performing "abstract tasks that require problem-solving, intuition, persuasion and creativity", working in professions like "law, medicine, science, engineering, advertising and design" "benefit from computers". Let me focus on engineering and design and show that these assumptions do not show the whole picture. Also, I will focus on only one industry: automotive

Free Trade Propaganda?

The  Bertelsmann Stiftung(Foundation) published a study today claiming that a Transatlantic Free Trade Area would increase employment by 160.000 in Germany. Together with the Munich based IFO Institute they proved that in economics there is only extremely limited knowledge of how companies operate; and how different standards in the EU and the US affect engineering. Additionally, I don't think I value life the same way they do.