Is doing nothing to reform Medicare and Social Security the cautious position or the risky one?

From the WSJ’s Kristina Peterson:

Mr. Trump, who tore up modern political conventions during his tumultuous campaign, has turned out to be a more cautious figure in the White House—at least on fiscal policy—than are many congressional Republicans. For all the talk of Mr. Trump transforming government, it’s the House Republicans who are willing to push for big, disruptive changes to federal safety-net programs, the tax code and the Affordable Care Act—and to take on the political risk that those changes would bring. Mr. Trump, by contrast, is treading more gingerly. …

House Republicans want to rein in spending on Social Security and Medicare—often called the “third rails’’ of American politics for the mortal danger they present to any politician who touches them. Their emerging tax plan would treat importers and exporters in dramatically different ways, creating winners and losers across the corporate landscape. Public anxiety over their plan to replace the 2010 health law was on display for GOP lawmakers in last week’s town hall meetings, filled with angry and nervous constituents.

Mr. Trump, meanwhile, has showed caution on all of these issues: He campaigned on protecting entitlements, called the GOP tax plan too complex and warned of the political dangers of making missteps on health care. His unwillingness to go as far as House Republicans had hoped on these issues could significantly curtail conservatives’ legislative ambitions.

I get Peterson’s point, but sometimes being radical is actually being responsible. Is ignoring this chart the cautious move or the risky one?