Joan Robinson in Economic Philosophy writes:
Perhaps Gunnar Myrdal is too sweeping when he says (speaking as an economist) that 'our very concepts are value-loaded' and 'cannot be defined except in terms of political valuation'
It is true that economic terminology is coloured. Bigger is close to better; equal to equitable; goods sound good; disequilibrium sounds uncomfortable; exploitation , wicked; and sub-normal profits, rather sad.
All the same, taking a particular economic system as a given, we can describe the technical features of its operation in an objective way. But it is not possible to describe a system without moral judgements creeping in.
Turning to mathematics - as a concept - is it too value-laden?
Its generally considered as the epitome of objectivity: one cannot argue with a number or indeed an axiom.