> I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either. Eh, this is a fal

> I'm guessing the person you're replying to doesn't do their full time job for free and just accepts donations from their employers, either. Eh, this is a false dichotomy of one can either be charitable or transactional in the entirety of the interactions in their lives. In other words, your guess happens to be correct (gainful employment is not a mathematical rarity after all) but still provides no counterargument. OPs claim was expecting anything with value without transacting something back was entitlement. My counterargument was that there exists charity and non-transactionality in many contexts. The condition of anything requiring non-trivial capital is also wrong. We often pool tax money to render capital and services for things we don’t have direct, personal use of. And I am not saying this is necessarily charity, after all it is an obligation, but most folks don’t go after the particular line items of how their money is spent.