The bonds/loans are spent and have to be repaid with future revenue. A bond is a liability to the issuer not an asset. There is a transfer and it’s current rich from future rich.

>A bond is a liability to the issuer not an asset.

From the issuer's (government) perspective it is a liability. From society's perspective it is both a liability and an asset.

If it’s used to invest then whatever is purchased is the offsetting asset. Sadly, it’s being used to fund current operations which has no offsetting asset. The offset is retained earnings. That can and needs to be fixed. It’s how state governments run and they do a lot of investing.

There's nothing sad about using it to heal the sick, house or feed the poor.

Moreover, there's not necessarily anything "good" about having taxes pay for operational costs if those operational costs are cluster bombs on yemeni children.

There's not even necessarily anything intrinsically good about paying back those bonds in dollars that are of equal or greater value. Sometimes (e.g. in times of great wealth inequality) letting inflation eat huge chunks out of the value of outstanding bonds is the best course of action for society as a whole.

Ummmm... you got a little sidetracked. We can do all of that without also going into debt. We shouldn't constrain future cash flow when we don't have to. And we don't have to. During a recession, we have to.

No, we don't. Constraining cash flow during a recession is the worst possible way to react to a recession in fact. That's when stimulus is required in order to make up the anemic demand coming from the private sector (e.g. how China reacted to 2008, where they fared better than the rest of us thanks to counter-cyclical fiscal spending).

Deficit spending only really needs to be constrained when inflation is around 9% (~11% is the point at which inflation has a negative impact on growth).

During a recession you borrow money, spend and that constrains future cash flow. During an expansion you repay what you borrowed - that's the constraint.

We're constraining future cash flow during an expansion. That is stupid.

I am not sure how you keep mis-reading me.

I'm not misreading you. You're saying that spending constrains future cash flow. This is simply false. The US won't run out of dollars, ever. Japan won't run out of ten, ever. They have a 0% risk that they won't be able to pay back their debts because they print the currency.

The only risk is inflation.

Everyone’s a Keynesian in a downcycle...