I am not saying that Rand thinks like Kant. I'm just saying that when it comes to the Golden Rule, in for a dime is in for a dollar, and anything inconsistent with that rule is not nuance but self-contradiction. An entire code of ethics can be deduced from Rand's appeal to reciprocity re productivity, so what use is the rest of her "philosophy"? She is a lightweight, floating on the confirmation bias of nasty dullards. I would pay her no mind.

In any case, a Kantian Rand still wouldn't have much logic on her side since in a capitalist economy there are no successful producers without many unproductive losers.

I'm not sure who your "unproductive losers" are, or by what measure you account them as losers. Last night, Djokovic beat Tsitsipas. Was the loser unproductive? Was he a loser? Businesses fail all the time. Some are doomed from the start, but many feed many mouths before being out-competed. The worker bees involved move on to the next flower. I really don't think you grok capitalism.