In a free market system, if nobody thinks something is worth supporting financially, then it isn't worth supporting financially, and doing it for free distorts the economy and reduces efficiency.
Is there a difference between "I think this cause is worth supporting with my money (which will be used to pay someone's salary)" and "I think this cause is worth supporting with my time"?
You have a mistaken conception of the free market. The voluntary action we do in upholding our families and communities is foundational to the economy - voluntary action is the space in which economic liberty occurs.
It doesn’t reduce efficiency because the volunteers are the judge of worth and their’s is the only opinion that matters. The cost of providing services can be quite low when the labor is volunteered, so the cost to benefit tilts heavily in the direction of net benefit, i.e. efficiency in producing positive outcomes at a particular cost.
Volunteers clearly get value out of volunteering, otherwise they wouldn't do it. Everyone is free to define their own measure of value. That's one of the reasons it's called a "free" market. A market where money is the only measure of value is definitionally not a free market.
> doing it for free distorts the economy
It's very noble of you to do stuff for "the economy". Most just pursue selfish needs and desires like food, clothing, shelter, and wanting to make a difference in others' lives.
