It's subtle, but I disagree. (Though, my wording could be improved). The bad econ argument is typically that economic growth doesn't benefit everyone. Considered alone, it does.

But if we have to borrow significantly to cover the gap between budget and revenue generated by that max growth tax level, the gap may end up wiping out those marginal economic gains for some groups.

The argument made by many is "the growth is good, it's how you deal with the other issues that sets you apart".

I agree the growth is good, but if we have to borrow to get it, what economic rule says the a marginal gain surely offsets the negatives of the borrowed money?