I think F. A. Hayek explained the conundrum that market monetarists face a long time ago in The Constitution of Liberty (1960, 330):
Although there are a few people who deliberately advocate a continuous upward movement of prices, the chief source of the existing inflationary bias is the general belief that deflation, the opposite of inflation, is so much more to be feared that, in order to keep on the safe side, a persistent error in the direction of inflation is preferable. But, as we do not know how to keep prices completely stable and can achieve stability only by correcting any small movement in either direction, the determination to avoid deflation at any cost must result in cumulative inflation. Also, the fact that inflation and deflation will often be local or sectional phenomena, which must occur necessarily as part of the mechanism redistributing the resources of the economy means that attempts to present any deflation affecting a major area of the economy must result in over-all inflation. (emphasis added)
This is another point of departure in the economic literature where the costs of inflation are underestimated due to (a) a mechanical version of the quantity theory, and (b) a circular flow model of a capital-using economy. Substitute in, instead, a (a) non-mechanical interpretation of the quantity theory that recognizes Cantillon Effects due to relative price adjustments as inflation works its way throughout the economy, and (b) a time structure of production that emphasizes the intricate matrix of heterogeneous goods, with multiple specific uses, that constitutes the production sector in a modern advanced economy. The costs of inflation are significant in terms of real resource misallocations that must be corrected down the road.
The recalculation of the use of capital in an economy is costly. Of course, the shuffling and reshuffling of production plans to meet changing consumer demands takes place all the time in a modern dynamic economy. But when that process is not distorted, but guided instead by relative prices that reflect the trade-offs that individuals are making in the economy resources tend to get directed to higher valued uses. But when the process is distorted due to inflation, then prices cannot do their job as well in guiding those decisions, and instead we get booms and busts. No doubt Keynesian discretionary solutions must be resisted otherwise we are endlessly caught in a game of seeking short term relief that destroys long term economic growth. But not all answers to the hegemony in economic policy to Keynesian modes of thinking are equal.