All of this is known and — technically- true, especially in circumstances that one would label as “all else being equal”. And I appreciate all these writings and acknowledge how valid they are.
Still the aspect of all else being equal is not always the case, although in less obvious ways. I think that non-rational decisions should not automatically be labelled as bad or ill-conceived. Because there may be non-financial elements that really matter, for example: forgoing on the -rationally- smarter option by choosing one that gives more social benefits, e.g. paying something to be with friends instead of spending that time on earning money. Rational,from a financial maximisation perspective? No. Therefore a bad decision? Not necessarily, as long as you acknowledge that there may be more than merely financial maximisation that is important in this world. Or: making a choice that is rationally questionable just because it lowers the chance that someone you appreciate is not hurt, or at least less hurt. Social considerations can certainly diminish the technical rationality of choices. It is in fact perhaps what makes us human and not machines.
The fact that emotions sometimes, or even most of the times, play a role in decisions does not mean these decisions are immediately bad. That’s only if you look at direct measurable gains, usually financial ones and think in statistical odds. But life is richer than that. I imagine not of this strikes people as off, it just seems good to be reminded of it.