This isn't even debatable. Everyone who is familiar with Rand's work and the actions of the exchairman already knows this. Anyone who claims otherwise merely reveals a weak area in their knowledge.
People must reap what they sow. When the consequences of success and failure are removed, people work far less and demand much more. Collectivism is backward because it removes the incentives to succeed (and not fail). It's a perversion that breeds sloth and dependency while punishing the wealth creators and producers. It's also self-fulfilling. The more socialism you have, the weaker the economy, which creates more dependents, who vote for more socialism. The cycle repeats ad infinum until the real economy is crushed, the dependents are legion, and the Government exercises near total control over the economy and citizen life. This is why Big Government politicians of every stripe promote the welfare State endlessly. It's a great way to consolidate Government power and create a nation of serfs beholden to their "King". Remember, wealth is power. The last thing Government wants is a free, independent, WEALTHY middle class. Why? Because a wealthy middle class represents a legitimate threat to the power monopoly of the State, and the parasites in DC don't want that. Better to rule over a garbage dump, then serve in a utopia.
An interesting theory, until one looks at the statistics: Norway is, if not the richest, one of the richest countries in the world -- with high taxes and lots of socialistic policies. Sweden has a lower income per capita than the US -- until you accommodate for wealth disparity, then they're richer than the average Joe in the US. Again, high taxes and lots of socialistic policies. Finland, same. Ideologies fail.
Scandinavians have huge advantages of low populations and high resource availability. It is hard to fail no matter what policies are implemented.