The John Galt model versus the Francisco D'Anconia model.

For more than 15 years, I have been following the John Galt model to protest the collectivist policies of the government. But one person on strike doesn't accomplish anything. You need a large number of the prime movers to be on strike with you. And even then, I think you need some Franciscos and maybe even some Ragnars.

The John Galt model in short is this -- withhold your ability. Don't do anything to further enable the machinery of collectivism to succeed. But even Atlas Shrugged's John Galt didn't entirely follow this model. He did, after all, have a job at Taggart Transcontinental. A menial job, yes, but a job that produced taxable income all the same. Whether he did it to make ends meet or to spy on prime mover Dagny Taggart and her collectivist brother Jim is up for interpretation.

Francisco, on the other hand, engaged in the system and exploited it's flaws to bring about the inevitable collapse of collectivism. He did what collectivists wanted him to do -- employed people at the mines with no return for himself. I'm wondering if maybe I should switch to this model -- sign up for every government program for which I am eligible.

Then there's the Ragnar Danneskjold model, which I'm not prepared to consider. Yet.

And the Hank Rearden model -- do your best in a corrupt system and hope someday things get better. It never gets better, Hank. You learned that lesson by the end of the book. And Dagny, another adherent to this model, abandoned it as well.