Not everyone loves work as much.
Having the choice to work more or less is good. We should be compensated for whatever value we provide, measured in a way that agrees between employee and employer (or between market and person/business).
So what's the problem?
That is a local optimization that hurts the global output. What is efficient for one individual may be damaging when applied to all society.
Just a theoretical example is that your dedication to work makes you a worse parent, or a non-parent, removing a more knowledgeable, better educated and more healthy human from existing.
I disagree with any top-down pressures to "solve" this tension.
You could argue that many developers are a net-negative for society given that the industry wastes a lot of time building X idea in Y language for every combination of Y.
"Don't be a burden on others" is one of the values I grew up with. Should be a universally good thing IMO.
The amount of social benefits that remain in people’s pockets after the grifters have taken their share are rounding errors compared to say bank bailouts and government subsidies (in the US).
I don’t think being a burden on others is good, but it’s nothing compared to active destruction, which can come with huge force multipliers. Every large organization have high ranked people that are rewarded for their destruction. There are entire industries dedicated to leeching off of honest people, like tax prep and time shares.
Rather than pretending that their latest open source project which is 99% the same as a dozen others is some extraordinary contribution to society.