There is a big fallacy here that the people who are going to be working more hours will actually make more money. These people are salaried, and may get better performance pay, etc. for more hours; but it is not guaranteed. Unless you're paid hourly, then the (admitted strawman) "I make $100K, which is like $50 an hour, so its like making money to pay someone $25 an hour." really doesn't work out.
The example of Mallon making $1,000 for her company an hour, isn't clear to me that she owns that company. Based on her apartment not having sufficient hot water to wash her hair, I tend to think she is not making the $1,000 an hour herself. I'm also a bit dubious that she would be able to bill out at nearly that rate, but could be wrong.
Many people who work long hours find their work enjoyable and would rather work extra 2 hours than do boring household chores that they hate. I am one of them - cleaning up house is like pulling out teeth for me.
I'm not against paying money to avoid doing things you hate or something you enjoy more. I just often hear something to the effect of, "My salary is more money / hour than I'm paying for the service, so it's a good for me financially." If you're not paid hourly, that's probably not true.
I'm paying an accountant to do my taxes, not because I can't do them; but because I don't want to. I mow my own lawn, because I don't mind doing it. I pay someone to clean my house once a week, not because I think it makes me better off financially, but rather because it is no fun; I would rather do something else (e.g., engage in some kind of home improvement).
The example of Mallon making $1,000 for her company an hour, isn't clear to me that she owns that company. Based on her apartment not having sufficient hot water to wash her hair, I tend to think she is not making the $1,000 an hour herself. I'm also a bit dubious that she would be able to bill out at nearly that rate, but could be wrong.