I cited a pro-economics source that admits there are some enormous payouts to top economists. I presume without knowing their names, that those richest economists are also likely to be the leaders in their field. Given the Pareto principle, those superstars are also responsible for the bulk of the most important (most cited) work done in economics.

Or would you suggest that that principle doesn't hold in economics, for some reason? That there aren't superstar economists who cash in on the fame they've earned because of their work's importance?

So what do their names matter? Again, I'm just writing a philosophical article for Medium, not a dissertation or an academic article for specialists.