Is there any economy that you are aware of that had high wage inflation without inflation in everything else? Wage inflation alone would be great for the average worker, but wage inflation plus equal general inflation is at best a wash, and much worse for retirees who can't take advantage of those rising wages.

The US economy is a great example, just look at the historical real GDP growth. The cost of goods, houses, cars, etc. have all increased over the past 200 years, but few would say that our standard of living has decreased.

The U.S. economy has not had "high" inflation (there were spikes here and there, but over the long run inflation has been quite moderate). That's kind of the whole point of what the Fed is doing, preventing inflation from running away and causing major problems.

> Is there any economy that you are aware of that had high wage inflation without inflation in everything else?

'Inflation' isolated to wages is called wage growth. Every developed country has gone through a period of wage growth.

When you define the qiestion negatively, with 'wage inflation', the answers you get will be negative

> the goals of price stability and maximum employment may be phrased as: Suppress wages and prevent workers from attaining financial independence / retiring at a young age

Economies with runaway wage inflation feature none of this.

Sure, if you only look at "runaway" inflation and decouple wages from real economic growth. However, the present growth in wages has been backed by increased productivity. The Fed has been open about the fact that it intends to slow productivity itself.

Fed has been open about the fact that it intends to slow productivity itself (pulling sources now...)

> Fed has been open about the fact that it intends to slow productivity itself

Source?

Increasing productivity is basically always good as it promotes growth while fighting inflation (similar number of dollars chasing more goods).

These first couple aren't from the Fed directly, but: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/09/20/fed-inter...

> Higher rates ... are designed to slow the economy by dampening consumer demand.

> The Fed can’t do anything to boost chip manufacturing or build more houses, which would fix the supply side of the equation. So it has to focus on slowing down demand instead. It wants fewer people to buy new cars or put in bids for houses,

https://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/why-does-the-fed-...

https://fortune.com/2022/03/17/fed-slowdown-rates-economy-in...

Interpreting the Fed's own statements take a bit of critical reading since they're both open about it, but also aware that most of the public would have a different view if they heard and understood what was being said. So, their wording remains cautious: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/cook2022113...

> When firms see rising output per hour, they have room to keep prices low. For consumer goods, this can help lower inflation.

Here the Fed demonstrates a preference that the value produced by increases in productivity shouldn't go to labor, but that their share of value should be reduced to keep prices low (aka a wealth transfer from labor to capital).

Then: https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/waller20221...

> I will begin with some comments on the overall outlook for economic growth and then try to explain how tighter monetary policy this year is intended to dampen demand and put downward pressure on inflation.

Here the Fed refers to wage growth and inflation as interchangeable, but even if you disregard that they state a goal of dampening demand. Perhaps the ends justify the means in terms, but it should be acknowledged that both supply and demand feed productivity. Dampening demand is tantamount to the Fed shutting down factories and keeping employees off of work. The demand for goods and services exists because they are needed inputs into other aspects of the economy. The goal is not to facilitate a productive economy, but to facilitate a stable one even if that means reducing productivity.

This is a wildly uninformed take. While some workers may benefit from inflation, price instability is more likely to benefit corporations and hurt consumers even more, hence why the left is meming about record corporate profits. Unemployment is the measure of people who are actively seeking a job, but can't find one. Financially independent people don't count as unemployed.

Wage Growth != Inflation. Wage Growth = Value / Share++ (i.e. workers obtain a larger share of value generated by their work) Inflation = Shares++ / Value (i.e. the same value is split into more shares / dollars)

Maximum employment != minimal unemployment. Maximum employment == maximum labor force participation + minimal unemployment.