I'm not going to bother dissecting the logical fallacies and projection oozing from your post. Instead I'll point out the factual inaccuracy: The author does not provide a "one-idea panacea". He uses a single over-arching idea (rent) and shows the subtle ways in which it pervades our society and economy. He then concludes with a laundry list of possible solutions (the "panacea") and alludes to even more. The author is under no illusion that this is a simple problem to solve. The illusion appears to be your own.
Please don't pile more fuel on an already well-beaten, general ideological flamewar. The comment you're replying to is already flagged dead, a clear indication that this isn't a thread of conversation worth pursuing on HN.
There is nothing "communist" about the article. It is a critique of the flaws of our existing crony capitalist economies and how the real "welfare" is provided mostly to the elite. It concludes not with some call to junk capitalism and have the state run everything, but instead with advice on modifications we could make to fix the flaws and allow capitalism to work a little more like we all believe it does.
I don't see anyone advocating or defending Stalinism or Maoism and going unchallenged here.
My personal leaning is towards Hayek-style classical liberalism, and whilst I see plenty of commentary here that's strongly to the left or right of that, I don't see anything tolerated that advocates enslaving or murdering anyone, and I find most commentary useful in better understanding and clarifying my own positions.
My healthy skepticism of viewpoints echoing 20th century authoritarianism is more than justified, considering that in many countries that authoritarianism has continued into the 21st century.
In 2017 there are still military threats from socialist dictatorships directed towards capitalist democracies.
