The benefits of the breakthroughs necessary to promote longer lifespans are almost impossibly huge. To extend aging, it will be necessary to develop a way to stop or even reverse body degeneration. Being able to stop the natural aging of cells or certain body parts, or reverse said aging, would mean we could potentially cure any injury or degenerative disease. Learning to control aging would require a massively improved understanding of the inner workings of cells, and would result in drastically improved medicines for a plethora of diseases and injuries.
That being said, the question of whether or not this technology should be made available is a difficult one. An issue the author failed to address is overpopulation. With the population rising rapidly, and possibly having already overshot earths carrying capacity, do we truly need more people? Of course, the morality of this question is difficult, but necessary. We would not only lose jobs for young people, but space for them as well. I cannot offer an opinion, merely point out the necessity of considering this factor. The other issues, in regards to jobs and health care, appear to be ignoring several realities. Any increase in aging would result in an incredible increase of medicine and treatments, and would make them cheaper as well. Medicare would not rise drastically, as care itself would be cheaper with these new technologies, yet another factor the author failed to note. Also, millions of jobs could be created with this technology, as any other new discovery. Whole new industries could spring up, focused around these treatments and care for the elderly. While not perhaps filling the gap necessary for every young person, it would certainly help.
All of this being said, I believe that the benefits outweight the costs. However, I do not believe this technology would truly be available to everyone, only the rich for some time. This would lead to a large class divide and a new sociological phenomenon that would have to be carefully watched.