BobR wrote:

While I don't think the national debt is as bad as some whould make it
out to be, I can't agree with you that it can be considered "good" by
any streach of the imagination. Bond debt for the purpose of capital
expenditures such as highways, public works projects, and national
defense that is scheduled to be paid for during the life time of the
project is like a home mortgage and can not be considered "bad". Debt
incurred for any other purpose such as entitlements, war, government
operations, interest and subsidies is not good and will have an
adverse effect on the future. Just like the individual that
continually charges more on their credit cards than they pay every
month, eventually the credit limit is reached and the cost of paying
for the credit exceeds their ability to ever reduce the debt. A
vicious cycle begins that will eventually lead to either curtailment
of the basics or bankruptcy. We can only speculate what that might
mean for the government but the concern for such programs as Social
Security are very valid.

That's why I said "in the main." Debt for frivolous things is bad (welfare,
farm subsidies, global-warming ameloriation, etc.). But debt incurred for
"investment" is good (bridges, infrastructure, education, etc.) as is debt
incurred to kill skanks, do-bads, squints, mopes, scrots, and toad-suckers.
The other part of debt-be-good is inflation. We pay off the debt in cheaper
dollars.