Exactly. That's the difference between the "charge is conserved" physics perspective, and the way EEs work. The physics argument can be made that a small 1F supercap, with 1 volt across its terminals, that is floating 10 volts above ground, has a charge of around 10 pC, namely 10 volts times its capacitance to the universe.
EEs would prefer to think of that cap as having a charge of 1C, namely
1F*1V. Technically I suppose we should say something like "the capacitor sustains an internal charge separation of 1C" but we just say it's charged to 1C, or "holds a charge" of 1C. We can pump that sort of charge into and out of caps and do the accounting correctly.The way that electronic designers (and the authors of mosfet data sheets) talk is the latter; we say "charge" instead of "charge saparation" because it's easier. We say "electrostatic charge" in the rare cases when the first convention is intended.
Spice, of course, won't allow electrostatic charge to be considered. Without a path to ground, it will throw up its figurative hands and declare a singular matrix.
The EE sort of charge is obviously conserved only in some special cases. All I ever said was that such cases exist (with examples) and that circuit designers should be careful about generally depending on "conservation of charge" when they do math. If they do math. If all they ever do is drive Spice and fiddle, no problem.
John