Remember 2005? Remember when the President's primary focus was Social Security? He's been awful quiet about it lately (must be all that immigration-reform talk). Surely there's a reason that Social Security has disappeared from the Bush's media agenda. Maybe it's been fixed. Then again, maybe not.

So what's going on here? Why is Social Security in trouble? Well, the answer to that is somewhat complicated, depending on who you ask, but here's the short and sweet version: The current generation of workers pays for the benefits of the current generation of retirees. Let's say that, right now, there are 10 workers to every one retiree. Now let's say that, for a variety of reasons like increase longevity, low birthrates (which result in a rise in the average age of the population), and a sudden increase in older people drawing on Social Security benefits, that ratio could drop to one worker for every retiree. That would mean an increase in Social Security taxes on that worker from 1/10th of average benefit to 100% of that benefit just to keep up the same payments. (These numbers are, it should go without saying, not the actual numbers.)

Knowing some of the problems allows us to consider some possible solutions. We could all have more babies. But, considering the current state of the job market, this might not solve the problem. An increased number of workers requires that there are actual jobs for these people to fill. Perhaps we can reduce the number of people receiving benefits; but, with companies reducing their retirement benefits, and other troubles , it's likely that tomorrow's seniors are going to need every dime they can get from the government. So, the "more babies" and "fewer beneficiaries" plans won't work—but there is a third option.

Current projections rely on certain assumptions about longevity and senior population growth, and like any other attempts to predict the future, they might be wrong. What if Americans do not experience increase longevity? What if the senior population flattens out, or even decreases? These are things that many of us are not willing to admit could happen, not to us, not the Greatest Nation on Earth. However, if you take a look as some common trends in American society, a case could certainly be made that the projections made by Social Security analysts could be very wrong indeed. And, if they are, then there's a good chance that Social Security will fix itself.

Increased longevity relies on a lot of factors: long-term healthful habits, like watching your diet and getting exercise; regular, expert medical care; and a little bit of luck. Given that America's eating habits are leading to epidemic levels of obesity and related health problems, it's clear that many of us are not going to be appearing on Willard Scott's birthday shout-out list.

That's okay though—we've got expert medical people taking care of us, right? Well, no. Healthcare is expensive, and it seems that it's only going to get worse. Seniors qualify for Medicare at 65—coincidentally, right around the time that many of them retire and begin collecting Social Security. But for those of us trying to make it to 65, things are looking a little grim. Companies are starting to get tired of footing the bill for all that expensive healthcare, and, unless you're wealthy, most Americans cannot afford it either. So, when it comes time for the doctors to step in and try to undo the effects of your unhealthy life-style, many Americans are finding that there help is inaccessible.

This leaves us with the following scenario: People have to work, so they take whatever positions they can, and part of their paychecks will go to fund the current generation of retirees. Those jobs will not have health benefits, because it's in their employers' best interests to outsource jobs that require providing them. (Don't worry; your loss of health benefits is good for the economy, according to some.) At some point the workers are going to become seriously ill, and will need medical treatment in order to stay alive. They will be unable to get that medical treatment. They will die. And they'll most likely do it before qualifying for Social Security. So, what you'll have is a generation of people who will pay into Social Security but die before drawing on it. If this goes on long enough, the number of retirees will decrease, and the average age of the total population will decrease as well.

Sure, we'd have a lower national life expectancy. But at least Social Security will be fixed. See why nobody's talking about it anymore?

-B. C. Silvia