Yip! You need to keep in mind it's a compound interest type problem, because you're speaking of change relative to a new change. Look at it in terms of raw data with fixed time frames to make it more clear. Here are the data from January of each year, alongside their relative change to the initial date:
1952 - 26
1972 - 41 (+58%)
1992 - 138 (+430%)
2012 - 227 (+773%)
2023 - 300 (+1053%) in 11 years
Now imagine we kept at the same relative rate of change from 1952:
1952 - 26
1972 - 41 (+58%)
1992 - 65 (+150%)
2012 - 103 (+294%)
2023 - 132 (+407%)
Your dollars being worth ~2.5x less than they would have been otherwise is huge, and largely explains nearly every graph from https://wtfhappenedin1971.com/ . This also ignores the fact that CPI does not accurately reflect change in costs of things like education, healthcare, and housing which have all inflated in cost far beyond the rate of nominal CPI. And all having the same common denominator of dramatic increases in government $ involvement, which has largely been enabled by the end of Bretton Woods.
I'd also add here that another child comment is completely correct. Inflation had already been increasing at an unacceptable rate prior to 1971, largely due to reckless spending. And that was a major reason we withdrew from Bretton Woods. But it was completely myopic. Instead of solving the problem, we simply gave ourselves room to make it even worse, which we promptly proceeded to do - much much worse. So now instead of solving a relatively small problem in 1971, we strapped a bandaid on it and gave a later generation an exponentially larger problem to solve. The point of this is that the delta from 1952-1972 is already far higher than it "should" have been. The "to the moon" rates from there are simply completely unsustainable.