Well, people are supposed to fund their own pensions. This is not a tool of redistribution. If they life longer, it is logical they have to either retire later, get lower pensions, or contribute more, or all of the above.
Proposed solutions of austerity and cutting and degrading services even further for the lower classes are exacerbating this tendency. I'm not sure what the endgame here is supposed to be.
In my opinion, most people are incapable of planning for their future. I've probably done a great job in comparison to others, but I often wonder if it's going to be enough.
Just because you organize a fair amount of the economy around ideas of free market efficiencies (which already has a big asterisk), doesn't mean you should organize all of society around that idea.
Further, there is no income cap on social security, you simply get deferred payments, but at 70 earnings stop counting. AKA if you take it at 62 and make enough money to get 1/2 as much from SS at 70 it's recalculated and you get more money than if you had started at 62.
Anyway try some numbers: https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/quickcalc/index.html Date of birth: 6/15/1950 Current earnings: $40,000.00 Retirement month: 6/2020 = $1,564.00/month.
Double earnings to 80k and keep other number the same and you get: $2,510.00 which is much less than 3,128 or 2x $1,564.00/month. Drop that to 20k and it's still $1,090.00.per month which 73.7% better ROI than someone making 80k per year.
Now yes lifespan is critical, but not enough to make up the 73+% gap. Marriage on the other hand can provide more than a 50% benefit on it's own which shifts things even more dramatically.