I think one of the main reasons your theory isn’t commonplace is the variance in tolerance people have for vigilance. Some people have a lot less tolerance, and appear lazy. Other people have an extremely strong tolerance, and to them, everyone else appears lazy.
I have adhd. My ability to motivate myself to do necessary tasks is very limited. But external pressures can improve my productivity by giving me less choice in the matter. By comparison, too much freedom can reduce my productivity by normalizing a reduced workload, making me intolerant of a workload I was previously capable of.
Laziness does exist. It can be fostered. But that doesn’t mean you can’t get improved productivity from a healthier balance in your workplace. Just as pressure has a range where it goes from motivating people to crippling them with stress, so too do healthy adjustments to workflow go from rejuvenating to lethargic.
This is a bit of a misconception. Wealthy people don’t get that way by not working, and they tend not to stay that way if they don’t continue to do so. The difference is that the work they do isn’t the physically laborious kind.
Wealthy people often work 60+ hours a week. They are constantly traveling, making deals, finding new investments, researching, etc. That’s how they get wealthy in the first place, and that attitude doesn’t go away just because they hit a certain level of income. They are self-motivated to keep pushing.
The issue is not so much that wealthy people don’t do any work as it is that the value of hard labor has been devalued, while the benefits of labor have been siphoned to the top 1% for too long. Those benefits have to be redistributed throughout the system in a way that continues to encourage necessary production, without discouraging high performance individuals from creating value through high level trade and investment. Finding a better balance while taking that all into consideration is not an easy task.