As Howard Schultz continues touring the country under the apparent impression that what voters long for is a milquetoast plutocrat whose primary goal is the preservation of his accumulated billions, two serious people with an actual chance at winning the White House in 2020—Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders—have unveiled dueling tax-the-superrich proposals that, they hope, will propel them to the Democratic nomination.

Warren's, which her camp shared with The Washington Post last week, takes the form of an annual 2 percent wealth tax on "ultra-millionaires" who possess more than $50 million in assets; the rate would increase to 3 percent for those with more than $1 billion. (The economists advising Warren estimate that only 75,000 families—less than 0.1 percent of Americans—would be affected.) To preempt the sort of accounting hijinks that would inevitably ensue, the plan also boosts funding for the IRS, imposes a mandatory audit rate on payers, and imposes a one-time penalty for anyone who attempts to evade taxation by renouncing their U.S. citizenship.

The projected payoff: over ten years, a cool $2.75 trillion.

Sanders, not to be outdone, provided to the Post on Thursday the details of his preferred mechanism of radical wealth redistribution. This one would overhaul the estate tax by lowering the threshold for payment from $11.18 million to $3.5 million; create mid-tier estate-tax brackets applicable to those with ten figures' worth of wealth; and restore the top 77 percent marginal rate that was abolished in the mid-1970s. It closes a few notorious loopholes and includes measures to prevent farmers, whose business assets make them likelier than most to be subject to the estate tax, from shouldering too heavy a burden. His staff emphasizes that the plan would affect only those fortunate enough to inherit more than $3.5 million—a mere 0.2 percent of Americans.

The projected payoff: over ten years, a cool $315 billion. By the time the ultra-rich die, however—kind of an integral aspect of levying an estate tax—the number balloons to a cool $2.2 trillion.

Which of the proposals you think is "better" probably depends a lot on which of the sponsors you feel more inclined to back at this particular moment. But two presidential front-runners signaling their intentions to overhaul a system which, at present, shields vast amounts of capital from tax liability is an encouraging sign that popular support for Ocasio-Cortez-esque tax policy, despite the active misinformation campaign waged by the conservative movement, is part of the Democratic mainstream. It stands in sharp contrast to the latest messaging from the Republican Party, which, no longer satisfied with its year-old $1.5 trillion tax cut for the wealthy, now seeks to deliver additional savings to the wealthiest of the wealthy by eliminating the estate tax altogether.

The upshot of all this: If you are looking for a nominee who will offer a specific, ambitious plan for addressing the horrific policy failures that transformed one of the world's wealthiest nations into one of its most unequal, you are going to have several exciting options from which to choose in 2020. It is also worth noting that these plans are not mutually exclusive.