Anyway, if it is so simple and easy, it raises the question: why hasn’t anyone legislated this yet? You know, during one of those sessions where both houses and the presidency are of the same party (two occasions in recent memory, one for each party) and put all talk of crisis to rest?
Because it's not necessary yet, and the political issue is useful to both parties.
Democrats get to go "we should tax the rich more to fix the gap".
Republicans get to go "look how badly this is run, we should privatize it".
Neither side wants a horde of seniors (who vote, in large numbers) actually losing their Medicare/Social Security benefits, so when the time comes, they'll vote to add funds and celebrate themselves for saving it for another few years.
1. Keep the donors happy
2. Keep getting elected
3. Line up a cushy position as a lobbyist or other government orbiter after retirement
Pretty sure actually serving their constituents is at the bottom of the list for most politicians.
I'm not saying this is actually true -- it's just my hypothesis.