“Galt would have been much happier not to have to do this.”
I’d be much happier if hamburgers fell from the sky like rain.
“Galt NEVER WANTED that ultimate goal, even though yes he knew it would happen.”
I cannot reconcile these ideas. Except to say that Galt regretted having to bother. But what does that amount to? He would have regretted more doing nothing, so he collapsed the system, and that is that.
I’m not very interested in a conversation about how much satisfaction Galt got out of “creative destruction.” He could have cried himself to sleep every night for all its relevance to our argument above.
“Like Obamacare, he was forced into a system he did not want to be a part of. So what does he do? Continue to be a slave to it?”
No, he stops its wheels.
“Unlike Obama, Galt never would have set out to collapse the system on purpose.”
Yes he would. He did.
I dont know if you are trying to be ignorant now or what...
Let’s try this a different way...
and pay attention closely
Two people walk up to a closed system that is working fine.
One of them see it the way it is and is happy and it stays that way.
The other sees it and decides to change it on purpose to ruin it.
Which if these two people is the bad guy?
The first example is what Galt would have done
The second is what Obama is doing
Now the person in example one is forced to move to #2’s world, and see what is happening. It is was not his desire to change it.