Since this is hypothetical, I would like to extend some additional hypothetical rules: If the last 10 years of my life sans money were of failing health or failing quality of life, then in a heartbeat. But if my life would always be filled with that which I deem "quality," then I'd rather have the life.
So I take it the prompt for this is that some pharmaceutical company wants to pay you 10 million dollars to test a lethal dose of some drug which cures some disease but also shortens your life?
The only thing money can't buy is time. I'll take the years, and make the money I make.
Also ... I've seen too many stories of lottery winners, athletes or gamblers falling ass-backward into a fortune, and destroying their lives with it. It's remarkable ... but it turns out that broke people can't manage money. People who don't spend the time and work to build a fortune often don't value it or manage it well.
It's about more than the money. It's about the accomplishment that the money represents. "A just war is, in the long run, far better for a man's soul than a prosperous peace." (Teddy Roosevelt). Skipping the war and lucking into the prosperity misses the point. I'd rather do it the hard way.
I can think of a ton I can do with 10 years, including hang out with my honey and da boys. What can I do with $10M? I already have everything material that I want. OK, maybe my own island or something. But worth 10 years? I don't see giving up 1.
Life is way too precious. I'd rather be happy than Rich. More time with life offers greater opportunity.
Not even close, I'd take the time, it is precious.