The fundamental difference between Bill Gates and a broker or fund manager like George Soros is productivity. Bill Gates invented and produced a software that improved and changed technology for the better. Consequently, he receives billions for his contribution to society which has been exponentially more productive because of his work.

George Soros has contributed nothing. He is not wealthy because of any invention or anything that his company produces. Instead, he has made billions by collapsing national currencies, and making bets on wall street with other peoples money and using that money to manipulate the market for profit. Yes, he is very successful, but most his success has been built on the misfortune of others. Now tell me, which of these two types of men claims to be an objectivist and which one actually is?

Jesus helped those in need by healing the sick or disabled and by giving to the poor. I do not recall anywhere in the Bible where it was indicated that his ministry supported those who were saved by him indefinitely. In fact, it was the Bible that first said that if a man will not work, he shall not eat. If a person was unable to work or to be reasonably productive, he enabled them by healing, teaching, or giving to them. In essence, what he did and taught was the empowerment of the individual to live freely with the ability to provide for himself in a manner that is just and reasonable.

Justice in it’s purest form is balance, and the Golden Rule is social balance. Therefore, a reasonable man will live by the Golden Rule. Rand defined objectivism as, "the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." This is the connection between Jesus, Galt, and Roark; the reverence of the human spirit and it’s natural right to carry on without domination or oppression by any man, government, or spiritual being.

Why isn't Ayn Rand ever considered to be a humanitarian?