Criticism of Math in Economics
I find that the essay "The New Astrology" by Alan Jay Levinovitz (an assistant professor of philosophy and religion, not an economist) makes some good points.


  ...the ubiquity of mathematical theory in economics also has serious downsides: it creates a high barrier to entry for those who want to participate in the professional dialogue, and makes checking someone’s work excessively laborious. Worst of all, it imbues economic theory with unearned empirical authority.
  
  ‘I’ve come to the position that there should be a stronger bias
  against the use of math,’ Romer explained to me. ‘If somebody came and
  said: “Look, I have this Earth-changing insight about economics, but
  the only way I can express it is by making use of the quirks of the
  Latin language”, we’d say go to hell, unless they could convince us it
  was really essential. The burden of proof is on them.’


The essay also makes a (more or less adequate&mdash;which, I leave up to you) comparison with astrology in ancient China to show that excellent math can be used to prop up ridiculous science and grant status for its practitioners.