Saying "we should cancel this program because black men live shorter lives than wealthy white women" is simply coming to the wrong conclusion

Well, that is a relief because that is not a quote from me. I said the situation where a poor black man who worked his entire life getting essentially paying the benefits of a rich white widow who never worked a day is not a situation worth preserving. I am going to afford you the benefit of the doubt and not assume that you are some kind of uncaring monster, a courtesy I do notice you did not extend to me, and assume you find that situation to also be troubling.

Now, you could go far afield and try and fix everyone's life span in some sort of geriatric Logan's Run style or some other way, but that is all far outside the scope of Social Security. Also, it's not like there is some mystery as to how Social Security is unfair - it plainly helps those who live longer at the expense of those who don't. If you find that unfair, fix that distribution of benefits in the program. Then, while you are at it, you can work on the solvency issues. Do note though, that if part of your plan to maintain solvency is to raise the retirement age, you are doubling down on the very feature that makes the program so unfair.

Finally, I should note it isn't just unfair, by subsidizing the longer lifetimes of the rich at the expense of the poor, it is doing the exact opposite of its intention. It seems to me that instead each person should be encouraged to finance their own retirements based on their own life expectations with poor old people being afforded the same welfare benefits society provides for people not over some arbitrary age.