yes, unless there is a breakthrough in the treatment of obesity (or a radical change in American habits), the long standing growth in American life-expectancy will likely decline due to obesity and its medical complications. here's a MSM article describing this penomenon:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/HEALTH/diet.fitness/03/16/obesity.longevity.ap/

Yes, but your belief is primarily based on the fact that one of the two political parties our country has wants to kill the program.  It's fairly easy to save SS.  It's really not that complex or difficult.  The reason we here all these complex plans is because Republicans want to find a way to get rid of the program, and they can't do so out in the open due to its popularity.  

I have to hand it to Republican propaganda on this issue.  They have been very successful.  

Those who wish to kill SS have an interesting definition of "broke". Even if the bonds in the trust fund are declared to be worthless and not redeemed, what would be the situation? If we use the SSA forecasts, starting in 2018 benefits would be decreased slightly so that payments did not exceed payroll tax revenues. By 2042, benefits would have decreased to about 74% of what is currently promised for 2042. Note that in the forecasts, the 74% level is still going to be a larger inflation-adjusted benefit for new retirees than is paid today. As you move beyond that in time, the forecast says the size of the benefit paid will continue to decrease slowly when measured against the size of the benefit promised, but will still grow faster than inflation for new retirees.

Consider the quality of the forecasts. Since 1996, the SSA shifted the first date out by six years, from 2012 to 2018. Since 1996, the SSA shifted the second date out by twelve years, from 2030 to 2042. The CBO, charged with forecasting the most likely outcome (and the SSA is not charged with that), says the second date is 2052 and the percentage is higher. I will cheerfully bet a beer that by the time we reach 2018, payroll tax revenue will still exceed benefits being paid, and that the forecast date for the shortfall to begin will have been pushed out to 2024 or beyond.

I have no issue with people who want to do away with SS on ideological grounds. The position that the government should not be involved in pensions is logically defensible (I happen to disagree with it, and polls suggest that 80% of the US adult population disagrees with it, but it's still a defensible position). Those who attempt to justify that position on the basis that "today's young workers won't get a dime from SS" are, however, saying something that is not even close to the truth according to anyone's forecasts, from the SSA to the CBO to the Cato Institute.