What's interesting about having a left wing voice is how it can increase the options and ideas in our politics.
The most visible recently has been Cortez of NYC. She's driven the hard right nuts trying to find an effective way to smear or discredit her but she's remained an impossible target for them so far. What's interesting is how ineffectual and counterproductive their attempts have been. Mostly backfiring and raising her profile in the Democratic Party.
It's her position on issues and ideas she's proposed that may explain her lightening rod status for right wing media attacks and her latest proposal, taxing the wealthiest filers 75%, is another idea that is driving the hard right oligarchs crazy. It might, along with other left wing proposals, have popular support amongst voters.
My guess is the Democratic Party will eventually smother her in congressional wilderness at the first opportunity and placate the mythical moderates in the burbclaves.
But the idea seems to have sound economic value and was even successfully tried in the US. Some may remember it on this board. Before the big turn of the Dems in the 70's had happenned.
Krugman is one that believes it has merit economically. More do than the idea that we should touch the rich lightly or they may not hire as many people next year to scrap the crud of the Hulls of the yachts.
IMO, Bannon's right about the Democratic Party having no guts for a fight and will pass on this idea preferring to outsource their policy proposals to centrist think tanks much like business execs outsource responsibility to consultants.
It is the only way of funding for a civil society and the rationale for it is explained by Krugman's op/ed here