Well, first off all, like you, the age 60 rule benefited me, and I am still a ways off from 60, let alone 65. It appears that you might assume I am advocating some sort of windfall for one group against another, but I can assure you that I am not.
However, I do believe all rules and laws should be able to show that they are based on something solid. There are quite a few that should be abolished, and age 60 (or even 65) is one of them. The age 23 for an ATP is another, actually. I had passed my ATP checkride and would have been fully capable of exercising the ticket just after my 21st birthday, even looking in hindsight with the wisdom of age and experience as a reference. The rules for deicing large swept wing aircraft with LED's is another one that should be dumped in favor of a scientific approach, instead of just applying a straight-wing turboprop guideline to the entire fleet.
Any time we discover a rule is arbitrary and capricious, it should be stricken and, if necessary, replaced with one that is not. It has nothing to do with economics, and everything to do with true fairness. Too many pilots like you want everyone out of the way, and then approaching retirement are the biggest advocates for change. I have been in this industry since I was 15, and I can tell you that it wasn't people like me (that were against the rule of basic principle from the start) who pushed the changes. It was more people like you, who were fired up about what they perceived the industry "owed" them, so went out and marched up Capitol Hill. They started out like you, "get out of my way", and then the industry did not fulfill "its end of the bargain" when they saw multiple furloughs and bankruptcies, so they went up and got it changed.
The difference between them and me is that I am NOT fired up about this issue. I always thought the rule was arbitrary and capricious, so should be eliminated under the standard, but I was not fired up about it. I'm still not. The rule, afterall, benefited me, and I planned my career around it, but that does not mean that I thought it was right, and so when the issue comes up, I will express my view that the rule was always wrong, and not because I wanted to fly more years.
What gets me more fired up is anytime someone tries to support a position that cannot be defended with science and facts. Oh, and the science has been demonstrated at this point, do a little research on the studies that have been conducted.