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.
“Which if these two people is the bad guy?”
Let’s try it this way: I’m not saying Galt is the bad guy. Don’t know why you keep wanting to have a moral argument with me. Even if Galt’s the most perfect human specimen since Jesus, it doesn’t mean he didn’t collapse the U.S. economy. Because he did.
Galt’s not as great a guy as Rand thinks. He may in fact be evil, and is precisely the reason why people like Whittaker Chambers saw nascent totalitarianism behind Rand’s apparent libertarianism. But that has nothing to do with what I’ve been posting. Whether he’s good or evil, he did what I said he did. That is all.
“It is was not his desire to change it.”
I see absolutely no evidence for this. Unless you go so far as to say no one is responsible for their actions in any environment short of their perfect utopia. Whatever world they find themselves in, if it is short of paradise, they are free to correct it by whatever means necessary?
Galt found things to be bad, acted to correct what didn’t conform to his ideals, and therefore is perfectly good and innocent and true? That doesn’t follow. Sounds more like the teachings of Lenin than a libertarian or conservative.