And if you thought it was hard to get hired in tech at the age of 50, wait until you try at 100 :-)
On a more serious note, it is going to be a huge financial disaster if folks "suddenly" start living to 120. There are many many things which have nominal lifespans "baked in" and if that changes gradually the algorithm can be adjusted gradually but if it changes suddenly, that results in insufficient money collected to pay out promised payments.
When you get to a certain age (varies by individual) you start talking to or consulting retirement advisors. Those advisors will ask you something like "when do you want to retire?" and "what sort of net income do you want?" and they will take your expected lifetime (say 100) and tell you when you can stop working such that paying out at that rate will exhaust your savings when you hit 100. But if you roll with that plan and at 75 get a treatment that extends your life to 120, well that is something of a problem right?
This would be a problem of course, but I'm betting this is a problem most people would like to have. If my two options are: Die at 100, and not have to work for the last X years, or live an extra 20 years, with required working, I at least would prefer to live and work than to die and not work.
Since I don't think changing the lifespan will change societal values much, and because of that I believe that statistically the likely outcome is 'want to work but can't find it.'
Being at the end of your life and unemployed is a markedly different experience than being at the beginning of your life and unemployed.
At some day it will be the case that we start living to 120. The retirement systems around the world, excuse me, the western world, already seem very brittle. I think the only lesson we can take from there is to improve the retirement system starting today. If we have to rely on managers at pension funds w.r.t. changes that are gonna happen, we won't be in a happy place when changes, inevitably, gonna happen. I think that many of the younger people already nowadays start to realize that much of these "promises" are void. If you are saving for yourself, but you trust "retirement advisors", you can just as well put it all in the big pot and cross your fingers.
On a more serious note, it is going to be a huge financial disaster if folks "suddenly" start living to 120. There are many many things which have nominal lifespans "baked in" and if that changes gradually the algorithm can be adjusted gradually but if it changes suddenly, that results in insufficient money collected to pay out promised payments.
When you get to a certain age (varies by individual) you start talking to or consulting retirement advisors. Those advisors will ask you something like "when do you want to retire?" and "what sort of net income do you want?" and they will take your expected lifetime (say 100) and tell you when you can stop working such that paying out at that rate will exhaust your savings when you hit 100. But if you roll with that plan and at 75 get a treatment that extends your life to 120, well that is something of a problem right?