I am looking to find a proof by double counting.
Logically concerning the left hand side I was thinking about the number of all subsets of a n-set.
On the right hand side following the same logic I see that with the same logic this will translate to summing up the number of subsets of all k-sets for k=0 to n-1 and then adding one more set.
This seems a bit counterintuitive as there are a lot of sets that will be counted double.
I looked at the building up of the subsets from k to k+1 and tried finding a recurrence relation.
I noticed that in fact the number of subsets of a n-set is equal to the amount of the subsets in n=0 to n-1 added together plus 1. But I cant see why this is true.
It makes more sense to me that $2^n$ is equal to the sum of all subsets of length $k=0$ to $n-1$ and then adding the set itself so plus 1 and thus having $2^n=1+\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}\binom{n}{k}$.
I am quite sure we could get from those binomial coefficients to the $2^k$ that we want to find. But this would not be a double counting proof anymore.
Maybe I need to look at the problem in another angle?
Let's count the number of subsets of $\{0,1,2,...,n\}$.
On the LHS, it's $2^n$, because each element either is or is not a member of a subset, and making that choice for each element leads to a different subset.
On the RHS, we count the subsets based on their largest element. The empty set is an outlier, so we count that separately. Beyond that, there are $2^0$ subsets whose greatest element is $1$ (just $\{1\}$), $2^1$ subsets whose greatest element is $2$ (both $\{2\}$ and $\{1,2\}$), and generally $2^k$ subsets whose greatest element is $k+1$.
Therefore, $$2^n=1+\sum_{k=0}^{n-1}2^k$$