I'm going to assume that in this case you disagree with national policy. So allow me to give an example and lets take the case of Reaganomics. I personally believe that Art Laffer should be the butt of many jokes and that Grover Norqvist should be tarred and feathered for how much the tax policies they pushed have expanded the national debt. I also believe that the GOP was taken over by Southern democrats who took money that democrats threw at education in the hopes of producing more democratic voters and just threw that money at the military and agriculture economies for them to pump out more republican leaning voters. In short, fiscal conservatism from the GOP is all talk. Any conservatives that would like to argue should please show up with numbers showing when a GOP led congress has actually followed through with reduced spending for any significant period of time. They have been passing the budgets under Obama that they love to blame on him. The GOP is a joke to me.

That said, would you now believe that I might just agree with your views on how poorly the US economy is being managed. However, here is the rub. I, like you, do not have a crystal ball nor would I deign to be arrogant enough to claim that I understand all the unintended long term consequences of the GOP policies or the counter proposals pushed by the democrats. In fact, I lived long enough to see how many of their policies do in fact have long term detrimental effects to the cost of things. Housing, education, and health subsidies have in fact contributed to where Americans pay much, much more for all three of these things than most of the countries we compete against putting me as an American at a structural disadvantage as part of the labor class. So if you can see by this point, the only thing about economics I do know is in fact how much I don't know and how much I do understand that most people that say they do really don't either. Same could be said for many sciences since most science at some point ties back to axioms that may or may nor fall apart at some point. As a systems engineer it is part of my job to simplify models so I definitely understand quite a bit about how reality has a lot of details that are hard to model and that can burn you when conditions outside your model don't behave.

So in some regards my point here is you have to dumb things down at a certain level just to get over the fact that even most experts are pretty dumb about the subjects they cover. I laugh at these Wall St Jr analysts on Reddit that talk about how they know more about the economy than Warren but the sad reality is if they knew so much, why did Wall St nearly crash the economy if they were so smart? Was it just malicious and by design in order to correct the models so they could extract more? Or are they just full of shit and pushing an agenda? Or is Elizabeth Warren just pushing an agenda of another class of people that really don't understand that those Jr analysts are more correct then she is but imperfect because no one in Hari Seldon and can predict the future with any accuracy. The bottom line is the greatest strength humans have is how damn adaptable we are to the circumstances that change around us. That is were policies that look good often crash and burn within a generation and smart monkeys figure out how to game that system just as some did under the welfare state of the democrats and others are under the warfare state of the republicans now.

tl;dr; Anyone that says they are an expert in anything in reality just knows a little more than the rest of us about things no one can truly fully understand. Sure there is a lot of BS out there, but being dismissive out of hand is exactly the same tactics of the people you are demonizing and adds about the same piddly squat to the conversation that their propaganda is. Real debate is pretty hard my friend.