but if you spend time in the village you build up a support network and its that support network that helps each other out in times of need. Sure if all the fish die they're still screwed but you can always find a reason to scare yourself into thinking you'll encounter the uncommon.

I have sympathy for this point of view, but unfortunately the most recent exposure I have to it is a local government deciding not to require Mennonite contractors to carry insurance, even though their competitors must. Apparently it's against their religion to imagine that the Lord would hurt a Mennonite on a jobsite badly enough that the community "support network" couldn't heal him themselves. I feel sorry for the poor bastard who won't get physical therapy and will be stuck in bed for the rest of his life. Maybe the support network could afford the therapy, but he won't get it anyway, because Mennonite elders DGAF. I hope he'll be able to sue the cheap-ass property owner who bribed the city council to pass this stupid exception in the first place.

True, but the story still works if you add "and a bit extra for a rainy day."

Germany had general health insurance even back then.

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.