The use of Crypto for purchases of goods and services seems negligible. As a result, the price of houses and pork bellies denominated in dollars (and as Panegyr noted, the number of dollars didn't change) shouldn't directly be influenced by the price of crypto. In this view -- and I'm not a macro/finance guy so take with a grain of salt -- a high price of crypto works like the stock market, making people feel wealthier and hence willing to spend more aggressively, and not a "more or fewer dollars chasing goods" perspective that counting crypto in the money supply would suggest. It has been possible to buy a few goods with crypto -- I recall seeing coffee for sale with BTC in Seoul around 2016 -- but the use of crypto as money must have been negligible. As a result, the main effect of the evaporation of crypto value is in making people feel less wealthy.
Indeed, to argue this perspective in a different way, if crypto is to be counted in the money supply (and I think it basically should not), general equilibrium says that a change in its price is just a change in exchange rates. No one thinks that the fall in the British pound is a significant contributor to US inflation; indeed if anything the effect goes the opposite way: the fall in the pound reduces demand for US goods and services, tending to reduce US prices.
