I think you're being overly alarmist. The projections you cite are, by design, pessimistic and in fact the SSA's "intermediate case" has for the last decade been unduly pessimistic. Moreover, many of the demographic fears (e.g. life expectancy of the boomer generation) that have been used to justify the political hysteria about Social Security have turned out to be significantly overstated (good NYT article here). Moreover, even if this year's "intermediate projection" turns out to be accurate, the changes we would need to make to move 75% to 100% are not particularly burdensome.

Social Security is and has been one of the most successful government programs in the history of this country. It's continued success will be achieved by the political will of members of each generation to ensure that their parents have a shot at a decent retirement. Every generation, therefore, the American commitment to SS will be tested by those who ideologically oppose "government" programs or economically desire the assets we have amassed for and the income we devote to Social Security.

As I watch the Wall Street banks go belly up and Congress offer plans that bail out banks but not homeowners, I for one am glad Wall Street didn't get its mitts on my retirement insurance during the last 8 years. As I look at the volatality of the stock market in the last couple of years, I for one am delighted that my retirement insurance is, by design, conservatively invested.

The truly frightening problem with face is Medicare, not Social Security. But reform of Medicare will require a transformation of our entire health care and health insurance system. Part of the reason the talking heads make so much fuss about the Social Security numbers is to distract us from the real crisis - no doubt because the only practical solutions to this crisis will occur at the expense of deeply vested parties.