No, Paul, the problem is the shifting definition of inflation

Is the natural rate hypothesis dead? Maybe. Probably.

Paul Krugman describes something called general inflation, which is quite different from consumer prices rises, which the Fed uses.

If the central bank uses general inflation then the Fed is always two to three quarters behind the curve as the implicit pricing is still not settled by the second or third revision. So the Fed is operating under a three quarter lag relative to theory, and the rate settings will all be algebraic about the Fed huge tradebook uncertainty. m Look at NBA stats for an example. We see a sparse classification of teams into three tiers, because the tradebook uncertainty on player skills is large.

The implication is that monetary response is slow and sparse fooling Uncle Milt into believing his version of the life time hypothesis.  If fact, we spend an inordinate time waiting for the Fed to make the corrections implied by bad theory.  Wealthy people make billions of dollars in service to Treasury, keeping volatility managed while waiting for the Fed to catch up.