there's a big strategic hole in this article.
The federal govt. spends first, taxes later. So spending isn't constrained by taxes collected.
The debt/deficit argument is ONLY used against social spending. When it comes to pro-capital spending, the argument vanishes. $40B for pipelines? $150B in military spending? $80B in annual subsidies to give big investors risk-free bonds to buy? These are also all deficit spending.
Progessives should avoid reinforcing the debt/deficit spending myth, since it's only used against progressive spending.