I'm not really sure why I made this chart:
I know that M2 as a measure of money supply isn't taken too seriously these days, and M2 as a cause of inflation even less so. But last night I got curious about the sources of our recent inflation. Is it exclusively a result of reduced supply and increased demand brought on by the pandemic? Or is there also a traditional Friedmanesque monetary component?
As you can see in the chart, M2 surged in the early '70s and was followed a couple of years later by high inflation. Then it surged again in the late '70s and was followed yet again a couple of years later by even higher inflation. 
For the next 40 years things bounced around a bit, but basically both M2 growth and inflation growth were moderate.
Then, in 2020, M2 skyrocketed at a growth rate far beyond anything in the past. Sure enough, nearly two years later inflation followed.
The big difference between now and the '70s is that past surges lasted a couple of years and then slowly faded away. Our current surge spiked in a single year and then plummeted like a rock. M2 growth has actually been negative for the past year.
If M2 is still tied to inflation, this suggests that inflation is not just headed down, but potentially headed way down as pandemic shortages fully ease and M2 follows a steep downward trajectory. But then again, maybe it isn't. I don't know.
Apropos of nothing, "Whip Inflation Now" (WIN) is a more compelling slogan than "Moral Equivalent of War" (MEOW). Apparently, cats weren't as popular during the Carter administration.
Then, too, he was a Democrat.
I make $100h while I’m courageous to the most distant corners of the planet. Last week I worked on my PC in Rome, Monti Carlo at the long final in Paris. This week I’m back inside the USA. All I
do fundamental errands from this one cool area see it. For more information,
Click on the link below… https://GetDreamJobs1.blogspot.com
I stopped taking M2 seriously in the 1980s. That chart shows why. Two surges in M2 were followed by inflation, but the third surge did nothing. M2 follows some abstract money supply, not one that influences the prices of goods and services. For most people, available spending money depends on wages, and wages have been flat or falling for decades. That M2 money was much more accessible to the wealthy, and it has caused inflation in asset prices, the kinds of things really rich people buy.
Do you track M2 velocity for direction of the economy? It's gone up 6 straight quarters.
Exactly what I was going to raise-- velocity has to figure in there somewhere, doesn't it? Back in 2008 when M2 was shooting up (though apparently not fast enough), this question completely stopped short a colleague in finance who was an inflation Cassandra. He either had no answer for it, or hadn't thought about it, and that struck me as very odd.
I also want to know where our old friend "ceteris paribus" has gone to. It used to be on the lips of every economist to the point where it became a caricature. But now that I think about it I haven't seen the phrase or its equivalent for at least a decade. I guess qualifying for multiple and complicated causation has fallen out of style.
You should ask the good people of Kent.