Is Government Debt Burden for Future Generations

Suppose there's a closed economy. Now imagine a household (economy) with two people A and B in which B always borrows money from A. Now the fact that B will have to pay back the debt next period, will it be a burden on the household (economy) as a whole? Since the economy is closed, for the household in entirety it doesn't matter. It's just that B will have to come up with the money and transfer to A, but the debt for the whole economy isn't a burden, its just transfer.

So, similarly, today the government funds the deficit by borrowing. Generally, people who lent are rich so say, rich lent money to the government today. Now next period the government have to pay back the debt, so it will have to get the money. Suppose it raises taxes. So now the money will flow the middle-class to the rich. On aggregate, therefore, government debt will not be a burden. It's true that middle-class will have to give the money and rich would get the money, so its a burden in the sense that the transfer process might be costly. It's like the government will have to spend money collecting it and then distributing it, so in that sense it's costly, but otherwise, it's not a burden. Government debt will have distributional implications but would not be a burden. Even if suppose you lent the money to the government and I did not (I am a tax-payer). Next, period me and you die. Now when government raise taxes one might say its a burden to future generation, but no. My kid will have to come up with money (since my kid like me is also a taxpayer) and your kid would get the money (since your kid inherited the bond from you). So, again in net, the sum is zero and its just re-distribution of money.

Based on discussion with Prof. Wouter den Haan, LSE