If you take the anecdote to be for an individual (or just a few), yes.
Now take it to the economy.
Economy != business or individuals. If an individual "saves" it means they forgo consumption, so that resources can go elsewhere. When the economy "saves" (and let's assume we are talking about all of earth) it means - what? The same economic activity but fewer people buy something? Doesn't quite work. We could leave resources like oil in the ground to "save".
On the scale of the economy, there is no "saving" for retirees, not unless you are looking for other nations to fill the gap (but let's look at the whole earth so that won't work unless you find aliens). The currently working population has to produce everything needed for the currently living population. How would "saving" look like, I ask again? They produce much more and put it into giant warehouses to be used 30 years later?
That anecdote for the economy could mean that you stop trying to sell people stuff they don't need (more insurance, more cars, more... stuff). you can still invest into R&D, and more relaxed and less stressed people will be much more productive in this field than stressed ones.
Looking at studies of worker satisfaction and - a bit more unscientifically but still enlightening for its popularity (this and similar ones) - Dilbert cartoons, and also reddit or HN anecdotes and what I see for myself, a sizable amount of the workforce thinks their work contribution is rather meaningless. Still, we are forced to keep going. There is no option to stop and think "hey, my job is actually pretty useless". If you act on such a thought you will be severely punished by society. Anyone who claims that "the market" takes care of all those inefficiencies... well, okay then.