A couple of things you've said prompt a response.

When you say that medi-care is unsustainable I wonder if you have fallen into the subliminal trap set by political deviates (mostly Democrats I'm afraid). Why does it have to be medi-care that's in trouble? Why doesn't anyone ever speak out and say that medi-care - a program that has been funded by a lifetime of working people's taxes - could be not only saved but improved if cuts were made to medic-aid instead? What makes medic-aid the sacred cow? Why shouldn't the mainly shiftless and dishonest be made to sacrifice rather than those who've contributed to the good of the nation for 40 or 50 years? Wouldn't that make a whole lot more sense?

Here's your two part answer:
A. More shiftless opportunists vote than do the elderly. The elderly, sadly, are the demographic least able to defend themselves against political gangsterism.
B. Threats to end Medic-aid (and Social Security) are convenient tools of extortion to get the elderly to vote in the direction of socialism. (Generally speaking that would be the dem. party, too.)

Another thing you said that I found interesting had to do with the fact that some 70 million baby boomers will soon be retiring. This will increase the load on the system - that's true - but it also means a huge reduction in the $ input to the system. The work ethhic of the boom generation has not translated to younger generations due to the "it's all about me" ethic that has come to pervade our society throughout our educational system and media.

Finally, if wealth is earned honestly why shouldn't good medical service be a resulting benefit? Isn't that a natural outcome?

Thanks for the opportunity to bloviate. It's better medicine than laughter.