I think interest rates, inflation, fixed incomes, liquidity, stock prices, currency markets, and more must be understood to get a handle on the question. Not to say that you would arrive at a right answer.
A larger US debt, for example, tends to require hikes in interest rates, depress the dollar (not all bad), and stimulate the economy (not all good). See, inflation. Better yet, read about it. Those on fixed incomes tend to be hurt. Those in equity markets tend to be helped. I’m painting with a broad brush.
Disasters, weather, domestic politics, taxes, economics, international politics, war, and more are very important also. Those things all factor into the necessity, or not, of running a large debt.
IMO, if the money being borrowed is not essential to the economic health, general welfare, or survival of the nation the debt probably benefits nobody. In the long run, money wasted is money wasted. All the new debt just gets stacked on the old debt. That increases inflation without increasing growth, hurts the dollar without helping manufacturing, and so on. Inflation without growth (stagflation) is a possibility if the government overspends on credit.
The keys to paying off any government debt are economic growth, the resulting increase in the tax base, and fiscal responsibility. It is always possible to spend more. Cutting spending always offends some interested constituency, beneficial or not.
If new spending does not lead to economic growth the problem is apparent – the spending cannot pay for itself without increasing taxes and putting another drag on the economy. Economic laws are not usually engraved in stone or litigated in court, but they are never violated.