That goal could be reached easily by only requiring that the user of the code release only that code as source along with the other program and requiring the user of the code to negotiate a licensing agreement with the original coder if the new program contained a significant amount of his code. Forcing you to release all of your source code, in addition to the code you might have used, comes at a very high price, up to and including loss of patent rights. Giving up your intellectual property rights is an incredible price to pay. Why the very people RMS wants to protect of course. You see, RMS is a socialist at best, and a communist at worst.
Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results.
In the long run, making programs free is a step toward the post-scarcity world, where nobody will have to work very hard just to make a living. People will be free to devote themselves to activities that are fun, such as programming, after spending the necessary ten hours a week on required tasks such as legislation, family counseling, robot repair and asteroid prospecting. There will be no need to be able to make a living from programming. So you see, RMS wants to make programming a profession that pays little monetary reward in exchange for social contribution instead. Using a software license with a political agenda of this magnitude is unconscionable.