I once had two job interviews in one day. The first, the shortest interview I've ever had, was for a maths programmer in nuclear fusion research. I couldn't answer the first question. Great place to visit, very friendly. Lunch was a sandwich at your computer desk sitting in a very tatty chair. We were surrounded by millions if not billions of $ worth of experimental kit.
The second interview was with an insurance company. Full hospitality suite with free booze, everyone in suits, lots of group sessions to see who would fit with the corporate personality profile. Later we were shown the office we would be working in. After two years we would be given a plusher chair and sit next to somebody vaguely important...

I tried to explain in my interiew that the difference between science and economics, was that one tried to fit the rules to reality, and the other tried to fit reality to the rules. I didn't get that job either.

A true scientist must love truth.

Economist is better off loving power (and proxies of it, like money).

This is another fundamental difference.

To go into economics is to love power and to yield power, and truth can always be bent.

To go into pure science (again), is to have very little or specific domain limited power, but to truly understand how things work.

No wonder the two don't mix so well :)