Sorry - no it doesn't. While Francisco D. & Ellis Wyatt did willfully destroy their businesses, the rest either walked away - or in the case of John Galt - persuaded others to walk away.
In fact Midas M. did just the opposite of destroying his business; on the day he left, deposits were returned. The looters hoping to find some pickings instead found his books balanced to the penny. Nothing remained, but none of his depositors lost a thing.
Francisco's rationale for willfully destroying his business was that the nature of mining would have allowed slave labor to exploit his holdings for a century or more - even in his absence.
Ellis? He was just grumpy...
Good points. Thanks for the reminders.
>>>Perhaps YOU need to re-read it. “Going Galt” means to sabotage then walk away from your business...
>>>Sorry - no it doesn’t. While Francisco D. & Ellis Wyatt did willfully destroy their businesses, the rest either walked away - or in the case of John Galt - persuaded others to walk away.
Sorry—but the first poster was closer to the mark: As I recall, Franscisco D. set up James Taggart, Dagny’s brother, and his governmental dupes to buy into a “sure thing” and then destroyed it, taking them down. The key point is that Franscisco was the source of the “Going Galt” philosophy. He was public while Galt himself (who destroyed his invention) stayed in Colorado.