Of course people with right moral instincts prefer work. That is not the issue.
Objectivism teaches that people are charitable (they prefer the term altruistic) because they seek to maximize the pleasure they feel when they are charitable. From this they deduce that charity is an illusion, and morality is in enlightened self interest.
This teaching is nonsense, because it does not explain why people enjoy being charitable. Nor does it see any difference between one who enjoys being charitable and one who enjoys watching Gilligan Island reruns. A moral philosophy that cannot distinguish between behaviors as long as they comply with the non-agression principle is a useless philosophy.
Nice to see sound, articulate reasoning on this thread. I was beginning to despair.
"My views on charity are very simple. I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty. There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them. I regard charity as a marginal issue. What I am fighting is the idea that charity is a moral duty and a primary virtue."
--From Playboy's interview with Ayn Rand.
"What is the moral code of altruism? The basic principle of altruism is that a man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value.
"Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others. These are not primaries, but consequences, which, in fact, altruism makes impossible. The irreducible primary of altriuism, the basic absolute, is self-sacrifice--which means; self-immolation, self-abnigation, self-denial, self-destruction--which means: The self as a standard of evil, the selfless as a standard of the good.
"Do not hide behind such superficilalities of whether you should or should not give a dime to a beggar. That is not the issue. The issue is whther you do pr do not have the right to exist without giving him that dime. The issue is whether you must keep buying your life, dime by dime, from any beggar who might choose to approach you. The issue is whether the needs of others is the first mortgage on your life and the moral purpose of your existence. The issue is whether man is to be regarded as a sacrificial animal. Any man of self-esteem will say 'No.' Altruism says'Yes.'"
--From "Faith and Force: The Destroyers of the Modern World," Philosphy: Who Needs It?, p.74; pb 61.