Not knowing anything about the nature of the work of the person you replied to means you are not qualified to comment on it.

That’s a very cynical take.

You are not completely wrong of course, but an NGO like you describe is able to survive in a capitalist environment. Without it, it would not succeed. It succeeds at this _while_ sharing and redistributing resources. Not in a perfect, or even the most effective way, but one that allows the employee to find a balance between a job and volunteering. And one that is a net benefit to society (given the cause is beneficial etc), compare to for-profit companies that exclusively benefit shareholders

I think some would argue that only helping a small number of people temporarily, may not be the best use of his time nor money. Maybe more altruistic than doing nothing, yes, but there may be better options still.