> Is it that hard to say “we think wages among the working class are too high so the central bank depreciates the currency”?
No, that’s easy to say, but that's not what they are saying, which is substantially more nuanced.
What they are saying is more “there are times when demand drops within one or more sectors of the economy, such that production with wages in that sector at their pre-decline levels would not be sustainable. The result is either moderate cuts to real wages or cuts to production that cut jobs with much larger ripple effects throughout the economy.
“Because nominal wages are sticky against downward adjustment, in the absence of inflation, the result tends to be job cuts with the immediate effect of unemployment plus the ripple effects that unemployment and the associated production cut entails. With moderate inflation, real wages in the effected sectors can be cut modestly without cutting nominal wages, avoiding productivity/job cuts and minimizing ripple effects. This has much more modest effects outside of the target sector, and avoids the worst effects (job losses) in the target sector.
“Also, easy money policies can sometimes avoid the demand drops leading to the choice between real wage cuts and productivity cuts in the first place, short-circuiting the problem instead of merely mitigating it's effects.”