You're caricaturing Krugman's view. First, he doesn't advocate for "unlimited debt" or think that there is no problem with it. He says that with the current int

You're caricaturing Krugman's view. First, he doesn't advocate for "unlimited debt" or think that there is no problem with it. He says that with the current interest rates, for many countries it would be better to take on additional debt than to engage in austerity, both in the short and in the long term. Second, he argues that the Kenneth/Rogoff paper showing some sudden onset of bad consequences at some magic level of debt/GDP is mistaken and misguided. > You can pay today or you can tomorrow with interest. Yes, that's how it works with individuals or households. For countries, it's a bit more complicated than that. Finally, note that Trump's uncalled for tax cut has significantly increased US debt for basically no benefit (except enriching corporations and the very rich), while those arguing against austerity would want to incur some debt for productive purposes, enhancing growth down the line.