Did you know choosing the train over your car can cut your carbon footprint by up to two thirds?

So, one family outing at a time, one little adventurer at a time, one trip to the museum, one dinner in the city, one nap on the way home at a time.

One train journey at a time can help create a greener future.

So when will you take your next trip? Find out more at nationalrail.co.uk slash greener.

What you're about to listen to may include some potty talk. Then again it may not. I hope it does though.

It's Tuesday, February 19, 2019. From Slate, it's the GIST. I'm Barry Lamb of Slate's philosophy podcast High Fynation, sitting in for Mike Pesca.

Bernie Sanders has officially entered the race for 2020. That makes three candidates on my count who are running on a platform of fighting wealth inequality.

Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Andrew Yang. This issue isn't going away. In the primary debates this summer, these three, and yes I'm counting Yang, are going to push everyone else to the left on just how much we should be taxing America's billionaires.

And if Democrats win it all in 2020, I'll bet the era of Clinton Obama's centrism on taxes is over. As a result, billionaires are acting like they're the most persecuted minority in the country right now.

Howard Schultz and Michael Bloomberg look prepared to run for president explicitly to prevent the progressive wing of the Democratic party from taking a sliver more of billionaire money.

Howard Schultz telling CNN that a 70% marginal tax rate, the kind suggested by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, would doom the Democrats.

If the Democrats are proposing anything close to a 70% level of income tax, how many core Democrats are going to be supportive of a move towards socialism? Not very many. President Trump will get reelected.

But if there is a possibility, a majority of even conservatives support raising taxes on the highest earners. And that's according to a Fox News survey. But the woke billionaires of Davos couldn't contain their disdain for AOC's proposal either. Or at least Michael Dalcon.

Well, Keith, and I don't think it would help the growth of the U.S. economy.

Oh, that's interesting. And can you say a little bit more about why? Why you don't think it would...

Well, name a country where that's worked, ever.

Even benevolent billionaires, Melinda and Bill Gates, felt the need to defend the good of billionaires on Stephen Colbert's late show, after conceding that they needed to be taxed more.

You need to have a fair tax system that taxes the wealthy more than lower middle income. And you need to have a vibrant philanthropy sector.

Philanthropy can never make up for taxes. But it is that catalytic wedge where we can try things. We can do innovations that you wouldn't want your government to do with tax dollars. But then it has to be government that scales up things like health or education.

But AOC's proposal is positively quaint compared to the ideas we've seen in recent weeks.

Elizabeth Warren has offered a tax on ultra-rich Americans' wealth instead of their income. If you don't know the difference, income is the money you earn.

Wealth is the money and assets you already have. Here, by the way, is Schultz's reaction to the word's wealth tax.

...