No. Economics academia is an "emperor's new clothes" field. They generate enormous amounts of dense, complex-sounding literature, and most if it is as you describe. It's never practical.
Sometimes there are interesting models that help to understand things that happened in the past, but as a field, economics seems unable to predict anything that will happen in the future (even on a fundamental level) and therefore can't seem to graduate to the level of science.
The concepts raise the standard of policy development. Consider how much easier it is to discuss a proposal thanks to 'The Tragedy of the Commons'. Those few words serve as a shorthand for a dynamic. Without it you might need to spend half an hour stepping people through the dynamic each time you wanted to refer to it, and you would lose people along the way.
The “invisible hand” is also something that actually does exist and is straightforward to explain. It’s the tendency individuals making decisions in their own self-interest to find others with compatible self-interest as the motivation to make a trade. Every mutually self-interested transaction adds up to a total gain for the overall economy because each side makes the trade precisely because they judge the other’s offer to be of higher value to them. The key to demystifying the observation is the insight that “value” is a judgement made by individuals in relation to their own lives, not some inherent property that can be determined apart from individuals value judgements.
Most economics is quoted to try and score points in political debates where the lines are already drawn, conclusions already reached and people are mainly looking for tools to push their preferred solution. In such an environment, you might expect to see an enormous amount of very low quality economics content - probably full of motivated reasoning if you look for it.
It doesn't say much about the state of the field, more about how hard it is to find the field in amongst the dross. Eg, it is reasonably clear that most people writing about about Marxism or Keynesianism haven't read Marx or Keynes wrote.