> put up interest rates. This raises the cost of business credit, and at the margin, puts people out of work, until employment reaches the "non-accelerating rate" (NAIRU)
Instead, keep interest rates now. Then wages will go up, but prices of goods also go up, and prices are less stable. This seems strictly worse for everyone.
> break labour power by legislating against unions, breaking up state-owned businesses into the private sector, and promoting the Uber-style "independent contractor" model where people aren't employees
This is not really within the purview of Fed policy, but the various legislatures. If you had the opposite, probably real wages will go up. In the socialist ideal case, more of GDP will go to labor, and laborers will get more equal salaries, which is great.
The other side's argument is that with strong unionization you would a lot of stagnation: jobs that have low economic output but are still there because the unions keep it in place. General Motors is a classic example of a company beholden to it's labor so that capital doesn't want to invest in the company at all, and it ends up having relatively low productivity.