To put it bluntly: the assumption that you could model something with such complex (and poorly understood) socioeconomic effects using a mathematical model is ludicrous. The onus is on you to show that you could even possibly account for enough of the important effects, the sufficient variation in their outcomes, unknown and unintended effects, and social reaction/adaption/exploitation. Some of these can't even be measured.
So your call for programming as a response says more about how well you understand the problem space, than anything about an alternative to current political discourse. Not only will people never use mathematical models to express their opinions, even if they did they would still talk past each other and hold tightly only to the answers which confirm their own biases. You misunderstand why and how people exhibit this behavior if you think a numerical mode of expression is the solution.
Everybody has a model. It might be specified in code, it might be a set of equations, or it might be a poorly-specified and half-unconscious set of assumptions and biases in your own head.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a topic involving economics where the latter would be preferable.
They do and that's fine. Now that they're written down, they're conscious and specified, so we can examine both the assumptions and their implications.
So your call for programming as a response says more about how well you understand the problem space, than anything about an alternative to current political discourse. Not only will people never use mathematical models to express their opinions, even if they did they would still talk past each other and hold tightly only to the answers which confirm their own biases. You misunderstand why and how people exhibit this behavior if you think a numerical mode of expression is the solution.