Economic intelligence

Is this perhaps an oxymoron in the way that military intelligence is often ( jokingly ? ) referred to ?
Being extremely economically literate for example seems to be no axiomatic precursor to being capable of making money, to becoming rich ( that is assuming you even want to ).
To my knowledge there has been no magical algorithm written on Wall St to turn deep and profound theoretical economic knowledge into a reservoir of money.
No two deeply qualified economics professors ever seem either to interpret or extrapolate economic data into the same conclusions ( a slight exaggeration perhaps).
Does this then make them an essentially worthless addition to policy making, or at best a higly tangential one ?
In real life it seems to me to be very normal either to read about or to actually meet people who are totally economically illiterate yet are extremely rich, but not vice versa.
Does anybody else find this apparent dichotomy quite puzzling and interesting ?
Can it be turned on its head somewhat to say that too much theoretical economic knowledge is a burden rather than a godsend.
( Btw I am putting this up on a new thread as I do not mean it to be, nor do I want it to become, just a continuation/extension of my ongoing, somewhat petty and vindictive verbal joust with you know who on the current global financial crisis).
Examples abound of the point I am trying to make. The LTCM founders as examples of not making money yet being extremely well credentialled economically, perhaps Richard Branson ( even Warren Buffet) being the polar opposite.
I believe there have been a few economics professors who have made partner at Golman Sachs and other investment banks, but none have gained extreme leadership prominence in such roles.