The worst kind of this specimen are the ones in local club/coffeehouse games who ask you to play on after their clock flags. I point to the clock, but he grunts and says "let's keep playing".
I shake my head vigorously and say "no, let's not, a new game, perhaps, but not this one." for the reasons you described. Especially when I'm playing a person of equal or better skill level. Heck no!
I've once even told a guy at a club "While you were playing infinite-time chess of the highest quality, I was trying to win by any means necessary ... Now why should I take this time-budgeted position of mine that I'm not thrilled about and suddenly play by your rules? I might as well have started the game a pawn or piece down!".
People looked at me like I was the jerk :)
Some guy said that to me today after a blitz game implying that it was somehow less of a win. It's not the first time I've heard it either. For the people that like to say this, I have some news for you: A win on time is just as much of a win as checkmate. If you think the situation on the board is more important than the situation on the clock then you are sorely mistaken. As far as rating and scoring are concerned 1-0 on the clock is exactly the same as 1-0 on the board. Therefore, budgeting your time is equally important as budgeting your material. Instead of getting snippy, you "nice win on timers" should be thanking the victor for showing you how poorly you pace yourselves. At the very least, the next time you say, "nice win on time" mean it as the compliment that it deserves! What do you think about those people who think a win on time is a cheap victory?