example - lazy drug addicts collecting free welfare checks complaining that theyre not receiving enough
drug addict is maybe not a the best choice for your analogy, because they actively put themselves in a bad position.
Let me instead propose the following analogy. You go to weekly football matches to a footbally field where you pay an entrance fee. There is also a possibility to enter for free, but then you are only only allowed to play barefoot (in fact, the guys who don't pay are only allowed in so that teams can be created faster; otherwise it could happen that you come, pay and there aren't enough players for the teams to be formed).
Now, the teams are created randomly, so you might end up on a good team and play agains a team of blindfolded suckers, or you might be unlucky and end up in a team full of blindfolded players. In any case, the game would be more fun if the freeloaders would be allowed to take their blindfolds off (or at least use one eye, especially since there is no extra cost for the football field provider). In fact, most sane (paying) players would probably complain about the nonsense blindfold rule, since such games would be simply ridiculous.
I agree that the f2p complaints are annoying at times (but, by the above analogy, they are actually for the benefit of p2p as well). Moreover, what paying blizzard customers should be bothered by is the service you are receiving in lower brackets. One of the things you should ask for is the class balance across all brackets not only the max level. And since blizzard has decided to keep the f2p option in game, wouldn't it be more fun to play against a (more) balanced opponent? Isn't the aim of the game to have some challenge not just an easy predictable win (think football)? Isn't it more fun to defeat someone who is equally strong as you, as oposed to just bullying weaker kids (at least for some of us
)?
edit: whether the queues are faster with f2p, is not an issue, they will be around unless you force blizzard to remove this option; gl with that.