>> more like we're going to pay for it over the next X generations

I think we need to move away from that construct. If we today are burdening future generations, the proper description is that they will pay, not us. The people saddled with these debts are not alive today. They did not ask for this. They did not consent to owe anything. It is little wonder that revolutions are generally run by young people. It would be very interesting to see how many of these multi-generational debt structures result in profound instability, but sadly nobody alive today will be around to see these decisions. In short: imho no country should take on debts that have no hope of repayment within a single lifetime.

Germany paid the last of its WWI reparations in 2010... roughly a century after the war. Even that was within a theoretical single lifetime.

I agree. Youth unemployment is a big problem. If you create debt and use that debt to drive down youth unemployment then the concept of "pay for it over the next X generations" doesn't even make any sense because when you are creating the debt you are also automatically writing a paycheck that clears that debt. It's effectively neutral on the economy.

If you have an economy with zero slack (meaning 0% unemployment) then adding more debt does increase the amount of work that has to be done in the future. In practice this means that the least profitable work will not get done and a backlog of work starts piling up. This is not a problem in practice because of technological progress and the subsequent rise in productivity.

Debt does become harmful if it is spent wastefully.

Financing consumer spending is a pretty good example. Since you do not expect to net a greater return in the future the debt is just an additional fee that provides no meaningful value compared to having the money in your bank account before spending it.

Getting a mortgage to buy an existing house can also be wasteful if there is a housing shortage (=more residents than housing). You're supposed to spend that money on building a new house or condo. The large difference between market rate housing and construction cost is not a flaw. It's a financial incentive for construction companies to build more housing. You just have to let them build.

Using debt to finance a war is also extremely wasteful. If you lose the war your economy will no longer be able to support the debt.

> If we today are burdening future generations, the proper description is that they will pay, not us.

Oh _we_ will too. More taxes, less pensions, more and more privatization of public entities, moving the retirement age up a few years ever decades, &c. the same shit they've been pulling all over Europe for the last 50 years basically

> They did not ask for this. They did not consent to owe anything.

Most of _us_ neither, only the elite/people in charge asked for it. It doesn't benefit the lower 90% of any countries' population.

It want the debt that made recovery so slow it was the inequality. And the US in in the middle of to doing it again - by allocating much more money to the corporations and financial markets then squeezing the aid to the middle and bottom in the name of austerity.