For at least two generations, people in Europe and the US were deeply suffused by an analytical model describing human intellectual and ethical development that had pretty much no empirical support, and had falsified evidence as its foundation. People literally believed in the id, the sub-conscious and the super-ego as facts of biological origin. Psychoanalytic terminology was common in every day conversation. Dreams were seen a source of insight into childhood sexual development. People who could afford to spent an hour a week trying to fit their life experience into a framework that was, in retrospect, arbitrary and unhelpful at best, actually harmful at worst.
Economic thought is playing a similar role in our social and cultural discourse here in the future. Phrases like "market solutions" and "open competition," "free trade," even "private sector" are used to describe organizations and activities that are actually opposite the meaning of those words.
As with Freudianism, our contemporary use of language includes references to economics that bear little resemblance to actual reality. The result is policy discussions that are at best misleading, at worst directly harmful to market participants.
So when you hear or read some of these special words, be sure to look to see if they are actually what they say they are. Blurred by subsidy and direct public/private partnership, it is increasingly difficult to talk the talk of neoclassical economics.