As I see it, a parent or teacher with sufficient (graduate) training should be able to explain the nuances of economic theory and intuition to an interested young child. Note that the binding constraint is on the instructor side, not the student side. I'm of the opinion that virtually any subject can be brought down to the appropriate level of the student, provided that the instructor is knowledgeable enough to know where simplifications are being made in teaching. An instructor also needs to be able to explain why simplifications are made and how they are or aren't representative of reality. Anything less is an injustice to the student. In the absence of a good instructor, the student, IMO, is better off learning the math alone, as it can be difficult to un-learn sloppy or incorrect thinking.

Most of first and second year core micro and macro courses don't rely on anything more than algebra and basic calculus. (Some Ivy League universities, who shall remain unnamed, don't even expect their undergrads to have a knowledge of calculus of econometrics until 3rd or 4th year!) A knowledgeable instructor could easily work a motivated and mature child through basic macro models like IS-LM-FE or simple game theory to build up a conceptual economic intuition before the student has the math background required for more precise analysis.

Thomas Percy cites some great recommendations for the requirements to understand graduate level economics and be an effective researcher. Most good economics programs will include all the courses he lists in their required undergrad sequence, and an interested student will want to dive into these math subjects to inform economic intuition, ideally before university or in early undergrad. I second his recommendation that students with a passion for economics would be well served learning these subjects though, if it were me, I'd introduce economic topics conceptually concurrent to covering the math so that economics problems could be used as applications of the math.

ETA: For full disclosure, if I could revisit my undergrad years, I'd have double majored in math and economics instead of just economics. I fared as well as, or better than, friends who entered economics PhD programs with math undergrads, but it required considerable independent study on my part. A math major might have an advantage by taking the CFA exams and entering a PhD in Econ.

For younger students, I think of it this way: economics and math intuition are both necessary, but not sufficient, preconditions for being an effective economist. Economics departments specialize in economic intuition. Why not build strength in math earlier and play to the departments' comparative advantage while building interest with some simple economic topics.


What is to give light must endure burning.