Where do the good economists hang out?

They need their own journal, something like Prescott suggests, a Journal of Aggregate Sciences. Where the Hamilton, Sims, Cochrane, Farmer, and a host of others. They need to be separates from the sun spotters, the expectationists and forward guiders, the prior confirmationists; especially the time travelling economists. Most importantly, we need to identify universities which make the aggregate sciences and upper division specialty of probability and statistics. If you took undergraduate economics and got confused, you are likely a smart person.  I avoided the class, spotting it for fraud as soon as I looked at the chapter on banking theory. University presidents need to consider this problem. I make it my pledge, avoid commenting on the systematic fraud. When I find the good stuff, I will report on it.

What broke the Camel's back?
Romer, doing Ito's calculus where it was not valid.  The boneheads started taking expectations at the time, then treating that as a stochastic process squared, yet again, which is to much even for Ito's Calculus. The claim was Friedman did it in his book, and he was mostly wrong. Then it simply became a magic formula mostly considered trash in any sound statistics class.  That whole branch of economists needs to be moved into religious philosophy.

Then the reading of tea leaves soon followed as described by Jon Faust:

First, I believe that the Fed now strives for “no tea leaves” approach to communication. The FOMC declares in its strategy document that it “seeks to explain its monetary policy decisions to the public as clearly as possible.” This is a dramatic change from the situation not so long ago, when speaking about the future course of policy was viewed, both inside the Fed and by most central banks, as a mortal sin. The transparency revolution began tentatively decades ago, with the FOMC offering occasional terse hints about policy. Interested observers justifiably gazed at the few words offered up like so many tea leaves, seeking to divine the future course of policy. Expertise in this form of divination was much prized on Wall Street.

The Fed is bound by estimation theory, the data they see at the time is no where near the data plotted years later.  The nonsense is yet more of the expectation squared long after the fact.