Interesting debate. This will always be an emotive subject (like ff vs bf, sahm vs wohm) until we all stop being so defensive of our own choices. Someone choosing differently doesn't mean your own choice was wrong, so there is no need to feel defensive. We make the best choices for us at the time.
It's tricky discussing things in term of relative cost because what do you count? VB alone is cheaper to the nhs than ELCS. However, vb with complications requiring further surgery is more expensive than a straightforward ELCS. Then again, vaginal hysterectomy is easier, cheaper and a much faster recovery than abdominal (can't have a vag hyst after ELCS, needs to be abdominal) - is that factored into the ELCS cost? Statistically some women will need a hysterectomy in later life and will have to have an abdominal op due to CS (elective or emergency) years previously.
Likening it to obesity surgery ("lifestyle choices") is flawed - while the surgery itself is costly to the nhs, the cost savings in terms of reduced chronic conditions related to obesity (type 2 diabetes, joint replacements, heart & lung issues) mean that a gastric band is often the cheaper option overall.
I do agree that everyone has the right to choose their delivery method. But I don't believe the nhs should fund an elective CS service on demand with no prior medical indication. The resources to do it just aren't there.
I've worked in large hospitals with separate elective and acute obs theatres. I've worked in smaller ones where there is just one obs theatre. The usual staffing pattern consisted of an obs consultant & reg plus an anaesthetic consultant and reg on during the day, going to one registrar of each overnight. If an elective case is on the table when a true emergency comes in the emergency has to wait (with worsening outcomes the longer they wait) while a second theatre team is found, and possibly a second surgeon/anaesthetist depending on the size of the hospital. Yes it's the same if the case on the table is also an emergency, but it seems slightly more palatable that an emergency has to wait because of a prior emergency. Luckily that's rare (has happened once in the 4 years I've been at my current hospital).
Many people have to pay to have the surgery they want when they want it (plastics, joint replacement if you don't meet funding criteria for public care) - I would put truly lifestyle choice CS into this category. By all means if you want a CS for no other reason than you want it, then have it - but pay for it. Yes it means those who can't pay can't get what they want - that's true for everything in life.
Personal opinion, I think CS should be reserved as an option where vb for whatever reason is impossible or too risky. So in labour if not progressing, or baby becoming distressed, or any of the reasons we do a CS in labour now. Electively if previous traumatic birth or any other medical reason why going into labour should be avoided. But in the nhs, not on demand.
In terms of your list of pros/cons - babies are delivered by forceps with ELCS too (depending on surgeon, one here will always use forceps for cs delivery). We've had 2 shoulder dystocia cases during ELCS in the last month. It's not a risk solely with vb. On the nhs you can't guarantee your elective surgery will be performed by the consultant.
I also wonder how you will cope with the loss of control if you go into labour unexpectedly, get to the hospital to discover there is one CS on the table, one semi-acute waiting (with clinical priority greater than yours) and by the time theatre is available (with exhausted junior staff on out of hours) you're fully dilated / crowning. Unless you pay to go privately you still aren't guaranteed your ELCS.
I get that you've spoken to 2 obs consultants and a fetal medicine specialist. You reiterated that. FWIW I'm a consultant in obs anaesthesia. Not sure it makes my opinions more or less valuable than anyone else on this thread though (with the perhaps exception that I've probably been involved in more CS than they have).