QE isn't money printing, it's a duration swap.
Financial conditions tightened after 2008, despite QE. The money supply in the broader sense (global liquidity) tightened significantly because of banking regulations limiting balance sheet size, and because of collateral requirements massively tightening up. No more sending CMBS into repo to originate systemic leverage - it's treasuries or nothing. Repo within the US is about 5 trillion today, and probably about 20 trillion globally (with USD assets at the core of the chain), so the 2008 style collateral crisis was massively deflationary despite the various liquidity injections.
There is also a cost for the QE activity - the central bank takes on interest rate risk, essentially putting on a giant prop trade on short-term interest rates (and the results of such an unwind were seen post 2020, especially in areas like the housing price surge and the banking collapse).
QE is not money printing though. It's a misconception. In some ways it can tighten. It takes high quality collateral out of the system and exchanges it for bank reserves which are extremely limited. As the QE "money printing" got obscene, banks had massive amounts of excess reserves and further reserve accumulation from QE was not an injection of liquidity at all. It really had almost no effect. If you remember, trillions of dollars of reserves were parked back at the Fed in Reverse Repo, and when inflation forced interest rates up, the inflationary loop was accelerated by the interest on reserves - the risk never goes away, it transforms and slashes around. In the '10s though, there was arguably collateral scarcity from QE, and indeed it is undeniable that a giant bond bubble was built up with 0% (negative in Europe) long term debt. Meanwhile leverage was zero cost or even negative real cost, which showed up in massive asset inflation (bank reserves from QE mostly don't propagate to the real economy. Even bank lending post 2008 has little to do with reserves.)