"Using the word to describe a basic idea like there is nothing to think about or there is nothing in the room just simplifies and kind of dumbs down language
You are correct. If you refer to "Science and Sanity" by Korzybski, you will find his best known idea is "the map is not
You have hit it precisely with "dumbs down language".
"nothing" is just a word. It IS not anything at all to try to locate or grab hold of. All this confusion about "nothing" being or containing anything is simply playing around with a collection of letters. "nothing" is only what we think of it ourselves, so we are bound to have differences. There has to be a word (other than vacuum) to describe "a lack of anything". That word has to cover a range of situations, some of which have been mentioned above. e.g., ""the train is empty" and "There is nothing in the train" one can be seen as the is nobody in the train as the other can mean that the train is hollowed out."
Just treat "nothing" as a word with various common meanings, and not something about which to hold a philosophical discussion. The map is not the territory. The word has common meanings none of which refer to any kind of underlying reality. That is my advice.
P.S. I mentioned vacuum. We are unable to produce a total vacuum. Even space contains iirc about ten atoms per cubic metre. There is no way currently that we can better this. So there is not even any appreciable gas in a vacuum. You cannot get hold of a vacuum and move it around. You can transfer
it by connecting it to something, but then you destroy the vacuum by introducing new atoms/molecules from the volume whose pressure you wish to reduce.