Like I said in another comment, I'm not an economist. My background is in CS and though I work with economists at times when they need the help, my skills are often more useful in operations.
As Ursula Le Guin, I'm not an economist, but I live in one.
Didn't mean to be literal, but I find ironic the use of the term, because it reminds me of rough which in portuguese, my native language is "Grosseiro"
“Modern economists” aren’t really a thing, at least in the sense that a consensus or collective understanding of economics is shared by a group denominated as such.
There is vigorous disagreement in the field regarding just about everything. The title of the underlying article may more appropriately be, “Popular Economics for Non-Academics.”
I have the impression that economists (the real ones, not the politicians that use that title) need an esoteric terminology to protect their field. That'll decouple macroeconomics from policy while it's developed (and it's still embryonic) until nobody can deny their claims anymore.
reply