The topic was a political talking point that the administration and affiliated people used. You can see a proof of it by very limited academic attention to it once the moment passed

I agree but did you think that even academics were talking about the topic in a factual way? I stopped engaging because the way economists talked about it was simply toxic and quite frankly academically lazy.

I mean, we had an unprecedented supply shock and unprecedented fiscal stimulus - I thought economists were talking about those just fine. Then, there was a political side topic of "greedflation" and this part was toxic, but that is almost by design because the point there was to deflect

I would have preferred a bit more hedging from people taking science seriously but I get your point.