Yes, there is an objective justification for working 80 hour weeks: You get more stuff done. You say you do your work in <5 hours a week. Why so much? Why not

Yes, there is an objective justification for working 80 hour weeks: You get more stuff done. You say you do your work in <5 hours a week. Why so much? Why not make it 2? How about half an hour a week? I'm not being snide or a jerk. The idea that almost any smart person can achieve their goals while working tiny fractions of their available time is lunacy. It's great that you are talented enough and your goals are modest enough that this is possible for you, but it's not the norm. It's not about working hard. Not everyone hates working tons of hours. What it is about is focusing on a problem. When Einstein was developing Special Relativity, he wasn't thinking about it 5 hours a week. I get why people are so inspired by the "you can get more done in less time" credo, but the problem is that it's a happy lie. At least, if you're going to promote this, be careful to explain that you need to adjust your expectations. It's completely worthwhile to say "if you're talented, you can achieve above average financial success and still have lots of free time and a balanced life". It's not fair to say "even though you only got 1300 on your SAT, you too have a good shot at a 20 million dollar buyout on 5 hours a week of work as long as you use Mechanical Turk". Neither the evidence of history nor logic supports working fewer hours as a viable life strategy for over-achievers.