You changed your argument from (or at least, what I understood to be your argument): 1. Bankers are primarily interested by money, which includes employees of

You changed your argument from (or at least, what I understood to be your argument): 1. Bankers are primarily interested by money, which includes employees of the Swedish central bank 2. There is a conflict of interest because the prize is funded by a bank to: 3. Economists are more motivated by money than doctors. 1 and 2 are not relevant because the central bank is not a bank in any meaningful sense. I fail to see how 3 has any impact on how one should view the economics prize. Could you elaborate?