No, that's Congress' fault, not the Fed. The Fed only controls the denominator. Congress controls the numerator. Inflation-adjusted minimum wage and support for unions would significantly alter the landscape.
Inflation has benefits, too, and it is generally accepted that a low, fixed, predictable inflation rate is the optimal outcome. Generally all the worst periods in history have been deflationary, not inflationary.
“The growth of the Internet will slow drastically… By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.”
In 2002:
"To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble."
I wouldn't put too much stock in anything Krugman says.
Sorry to jump on your frustration, but this has always been the point of fed inflation policy <astronaut gun meme>
https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/the-case-for-hi...
> It goes like this: even in the long run, it’s really, really hard to cut nominal wages. Yet when you have very low inflation, getting relative wages right would require that a significant number of workers take wage cuts.
Fed inflation policy is, and always has been a substitute for pay cuts for laborers.