Isn't part of the problem here that bureaucrats measure and define their own metrics. They have every incentive to report that their policies are effective. Th

Isn't part of the problem here that bureaucrats measure and define their own metrics. They have every incentive to report that their policies are effective. There are also malign incentives around Cantillon effects and central planning generally. An incumbent will celebrate economic performance under his reign. He can freely cherry pick flattering statistics and his supporters will repeat the same. The state of the economy is immaterial. Opposition politicians will claim that the incumbent's central planning policies are to blame. When in office the roles reverse. Even if the opposition gives lip service to laissez-faire policies, special circumstances requiring central planning always seem to emerge. Opponents of laissez-faire cite this behavior as proof of debunking. Regardless of who is in charge, the Fed chair will pick a number and price fix the rate of interest. Partisans squabble. Court economists rationalize. Somewhere beyond this charade economic production happens.