"Mo' Money, Mo' Problems" is right

In introductory economics classes, students are taught that people work the number of hours they do because they choose a point on their work/leisure curve that maximizes their satisfaction with life, in general. This would imply that, since more money comes at the cost of less leisure, money somehow compensates for it by reducing stress and increasing happiness in your life through increased availability of resources (ie, more money). However, according to a recent New York Times article:

Perhaps for the first time since we’ve kept track of such things, higher-income folks work more hours than lower-wage earners do. Since 1980, the number of men in the bottom fifth of the income ladder who work long hours (over 49 hours per week) has dropped by half, according to a study by the economists Peter Kuhn and Fernando Lozano. But among the top fifth of earners, long weeks have increased by 80 percent.
...
One result is that even with the same work hours and household duties, women with higher incomes report feeling more stressed than women with lower incomes, according to a recent study by the economists Daniel Hamermesh and Jungmin Lee. In other words, not only does more money not solve our problems at home, it may even make things worse.

That, from what I can tell, means that richer Americans are so far along on their money-leisure relationship curve that they get reduced satisfaction from each additional hour they spend at work (rather than at leisure)... If they are rational actors, they should immediately readjust their work-leisure choice to improve their overall satisfaction. Maybe they just haven't quite realized that their work is cutting into their overall satisfaction.

[via NYT]