I still don't know whether that old lady worked because she had to or because she wanted to. The second part I think almost everybody would agree that a lot of sense of fulfillment can be derived from just the act of working regardless of the wage (e.g. volunteering).

As far as the first part it's not all that complicated if you look at the fundamentals. Social security does not have to be a pyramid scheme. As long as on average people get back what they put in it is sustainable (there are details about cost of living and inflation but those are technicalities that are simple math). It boils down to - the current retirees get what the current workers put in. It seems pretty fair too - what people get is tied to the current economic conditions, so their retirement is not tied to what a cup of coffee or a loaf of bread cost 50 years ago when they contributed. It's a simple social contract - no need for the pathos about those past generations, how they made the country what it is, what they had to live through, what they had to sacrifice - just make sure something cross-generational as retirement scheme works. Because that's just the nature of things - if it doesn't work on a country level it has to work on family level, i.e. children will still have to care for their parents when those stop working.

The problem is when on average people get more than what is put in, then the difference has to come from somewhere. The solution is obvious and simple - scale back what people get in retirement. They get more either because they live longer than expected, or because they were promised more than they should've been promised. So, raise the age before they can draw benefits (because they now live longer), and scale back what was promised.
The problem is entirely political - those who get retirement benefits vote the most and have by far the strongest lobby, so the politicians elected as a result continue to perpetuate this unsustainable state. Eventually this will have to be addressed, when it grows to be too big of a problem to ignore, and the result will be far worse then than if it is addressed sooner.

But everybody is selfish - retirees think they may be dead by then, or in a too bad shape to know what's happening to them; politicians' highest priority is their current job. And so this is just how it is going to be.
The only way out is if the economy grows enough to support those high benefits (for sustainability you need the current contributions to equal to the current payments). But, that is not likely to happen either with the US economic structure - it prioritizes capital over labor, the capital is highly concentrated among very few people, so the profits don't contribute much to the social security fund.
Alternatively young people would smart up and start voting in larger fraction for their interest, that could solve the political issue and make sure what needs to be done gets done.

I've lived in Germany for a while - the way they run things would be characterized in USA as 'pure socialism'. It's far more egalitarian society too. I don't think they work harder than americans.