The wasteful quest for immortality(newscientist.com)
newscientist.com
The wasteful quest for immortality
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428690.400-the-wasteful-quest-for-immortality.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428690.400-the-wasteful-quest-for-immortality.html
Quantity vs quality: yes, quality of life is extremely important. And that's significantly impaired when you can't go to the bathroom unassisted or identify your children.
Inequality: all technologies are unevenly distributed at first, and then prices fall. And it's even less of a problem here, because curing aging would tremendously reduce medical costs. Governments and health insurers would likely profit by providing treatment for free.
Overpopulation: last I heard birth rates were falling rapidly, and global population was projected to peak in this century. Meanwhile there's a whole universe out there; talk to me again when we've filled half the Milky Way.
We haven't recovered from the idea that growing old is an awful disaster, which must somehow be put off.
Having your body and mind slowly degenerate (assuming you're lucky; quickly if you're not) is in fact awful.
If nothing awful happens to you, you go on doing what you're doing and looking for more.
If "nothing" happens to you by 90, meaning that you're physically and mentally able take care for yourself, then you're more fortunate than most. A healthy lifestyle can improve your chances, but isn't anywhere close to a guarantee.
When he found he was dying of cancer, Steve Jobs made this interesting remark, that it was the best thing that ever happened to him because it made his priorities clear. He said nobody wants to die but it is life's best invention, it is the mechanism of change. He had a point.
And then he spent vast resources trying to get cured. Another case of stated preferences versus revealed preferences.