It does not show the vast leap M1 does - and mostly because the M1 metric itself has changed - not the underlying amount of money in the world.
I mean that M1 jump in "real" numbers would mean a creation of 16 Trillion dollars - insane
There's a relation between the two:
> Economic growth tends to have a natural deflationary effect, even if the supply of money does not shrink. Some evidence of this phenomenon can be observed in the technology sector, where innovations and technological advancements are growing faster than inflation; currently, the prices of televisions, cellphones, and computers tend to be falling. [https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/070615/what-correla...]
Your parent posts are right. The definition of M1 changed. The "omg so much printing in the last year" folks are literally taking two different definitions that are $16 TRILLION dollars apart due to the change in Reg D and conflating them.
from the Q&A page linked at the bottom:
> Recognizing savings deposits as a transaction account as of May 2020 will cause a series break in the M1 monetary aggregate. Beginning with the May 2020 observation, M1 will increase by the size of the industry total of savings deposits, which amounted to approximately $11.2 trillion