well, isn't it annoying when you paid for "nothing"? i.e., you've subsidized a product that your competitor didn't (here, competitor is basically every other human being) have to, and yet both got the same benefit. Therefore, you've been "disadvantaged".
I pay taxes for services I will never use (therefore I paid for "nothing) (and often could not use e.g. I don't have children and don't plan to have any either but my taxes subsidise state education (which is fantastic)).
I donate money to open source projects who release their projects and code to people who have never paid (which is a tiny fraction of what the people who write open source code and then give it away give).
The buddhists (I'm an atheist but there is much to admire in some religions) have a concept called pāramitā "the perfection of giving" which (horribly and likely inaccurately described) is the idea of giving without attachment expecting no return.
Also in this case the person who paid for X got X, that others also got X has no effect on the person who paid.
How can I be the elite when everyone gets a castle.
(note: this is how is post appeared to me, I've no idea if it's accurate.)