I fully understand the need for this — or any — proposal to be publicly discussed and debated. That’s what I’m trying to get started.

As I understood your article, it called for the Democratic Party to focus on the needs of “workers and farmers” in ways that would redistribute income or wealth or both from ‘the rich’. That is a form of ‘us’ versus ‘them’.

If my proposal were adopted there would still be government spending and it would still be directed towards this group or that. (Personally, I think farmers perform the most important function in the nation, and we should see to it that their efforts are rewarded appropriately.) Without taxation/public debt, such spending would not involve redistributing anything from anyone that was already in someone’s possession.