We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Rather than using it as a starting point for a discussion of depression, it looks like a better opportunity to step on The Barrister's turf and say that is is a fine example of the informal logical fallacy of cum hoc ergo propter hoc.
Reporters are notoriously ignorant of science and statistics. More likely than not, an arrow of causality can be postulated such that people with emotional frailties tend towards certain lines of work in which they can succeed, and in which they will not feel overly stressed.
I have made the same observation regarding the cars people drive. People in the Ford Taurus always seem so depressed; those I pass who are driving the official car of Maine, the Subaru Outback, look angry and determined, always sporting bumper stickers calling the President a punk-ass chump and some kind of equal sign; people who drive land Rovers and Hummers look downright ebullient.
The most obvious thing about depression that wasn't controlled for in that study (at least as reported in the article) is that women have a higher incidence of depression than men. Their top 3 Most Depressing Occupations also look like occupations likely to be done preponderantly by women. I don't think I'd like to make a case for the proposition that working in a warehouse facility for the abandoned, unlucky, senile and incontinent elderly is a low-stress occupation.