alt Hacker NewsWe already have tons of those models.
None of them are perfect.
And they never will be.
Could the be better? Yes.
The problem is, you won't really know they're better until post-ex. And even then, you'll never be sure how much better. They're always bound to fail catastrophically at some point. Etc.
In fairness we don't really have such models, at least not anymore.
We used to, that's what “macro” economics was about. The models where crude but they did the job for a while, we used them for more than 30 years between the 40s and the late 70s, with great success (no economic crisis for the longest time since the industrial revolution).
But they conflicted with the idea that economist made of their job, as these models didn't include any if the classical economics credo that economists had been worshipping for almost two centuries (markets, competition, scarcity, supply and demand, etc.). So people started building “micro-founded” macro models, that tried to reconcile the empirical models that worked with the ideological principles of classical economics. But you can't have good models if you design them to match an ideological paradigm.
And then as you said, it failed catastrophically: the oil shock came, and suddenly the forecasts of the models became useless for a while. At that very moment, everyone who opposed to using models to justify state intervention where thrilled, and the era of short-terms economic engineering based on models was dead.