The Kesh people, who according to Ursula K. Le Guin “might be going to have lived a long, long time from now,” define wealth as the ability to give a lot without expecting an equivalent return. Today already, aside from purchases, contractually agreed upon services or strategic donations, one can give without expecting anything in return, relying instead upon indirect, mutual aid. What can emerge therefrom is gratitude – a force that does not guarantee but rather fosters social cohesion. It is a glue that holds a community together, in which contribution and reception are based on voluntary participation. If, though, I accept something not because I want it, but because I need it and no one else can give it to me, then I consent not with gratitude but with mistrust. In this instance, even if the giving is wrapped up as a gift, something can be demanded in return. For it was the giver who was rewarded—with power. To oppose an unwanted gift, such as a job, one would need, thinking along the lines of Lévi-Strauss, alternative options (inheritance, self-sufficiency through gardening), violence (sabotage), an indispensable counter-gift (specialization), or a change of interest (idleness instead of unemployment, or the philosophy of the Kesh). Then it would be possible to abolish all of the obligations that weigh people down and which it is hoped they cannot fulfill. Welcome!