Jay-Z Announces 2010 Tour Dates. Chicago Not On List.
Extra, Extra
Around Town
Health Care Bill Heads To U.S. House Floor For Debate, Vote
Alleged Lottery Ticket Con Artists Charged
Usually we're pretty keen on jumping on the Todd-Stroger-hatin' bandwagon when we hear about yet another cut to some desperately needed county program. But as the casualties continue to pile up, we find ourselves focusing less on Toddler and the 17 dwarves and more on the people who are losing the precious services they need to survive — and it just sucks.
The latest loss is particularly heartbreaking — Stroger Hospital will no longer perform routine mammogram checks. Since breast cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in women in this country, and mammogram screenings are attributed as a major factor in the recent decline in breast cancer deaths, we think this is absolutely inexcusable.
As is the reasoning behind the decision, per President Stroger: that the county is simply bearing too much of the burden for the uninsured. Hm. Really? Because we think it's more like the county is bearing too much of the burden for Stroger's pals and unncessary employees.
We find it increasingly difficult to believe (really, we never bought it in the first place) that the money can't be found elsewhere. Making the choice to close clinics and cease operation of critical health services like mammography screenings — which their own web site cites as crucial — and then mumbling incoherently about tax hikes is unacceptable. Maybe our thinking is a bit too pragmatic for the bloated county system, but we'd rather see Mammography Vans on the streets than Toddler in the President's chair.
Photo via plateshack.com.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Aside from the reprehensible fact that this will cut off a vital service (proving once again that this country views healthcare a privilege instead of a right), it also proves, once again, that politicians are too stupid to recognize that preventive health care is far cheaper than treating disease. They may not care about the women whose breast disease will advance beyond earlier stages as a result of this, but they'll surely care when those women require more extensive treatment.
oh my god I hate Todd Stroger.
People have a right to as much health care as they can afford.
Government-funded health care, however, is most certainly a privilege and absolutely not a right.
Nitty fact check: breast cancer is the second highest cancer cause of death among women in the US. Breast cancer 40,000; lung cancer, approx. 70,000. Cardiovascular disease is the leading killer of women in the US; approx. 500,000 a year.
#2 - Citing a 1993 speech by the founder of the Ayn Rand Institute (a philosopher, not a physician or health care administrator) in order to disagree with a post on county-funded health-care? Seems something of a stretch to me.
Please enlighten those of us who do not understand why what he has to say is pertinent to this issue?
I bet if the issue were prostrate screenings, Stroger and Co. would find a way to keep that around.
Ha ha, apparently your prostrate is inside your rectrum. =D
#2 spare us that lame article.
My mom is involved in this issue in Oregon and she says similar cuts are being made as well. The neocons spend half a trillion (and counting, 10,000 every second) on a war of choice and on the local level corrupt democrats enrich themselves at the expense of the citizenry. U-S-A! U-S-A! We're number one! We can't take care of our citizens and yet my heart swells with pride!
Sorry about the mix-up with the breast cancer stats. I was looking at a lot of information, including the fact that cancer is second leading cause of death among women in this country.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/womens-health/WO00014
Either way, the figures are staggering.
http://cdmrp.army.mil/bcrp
".....The neocons spend half a trillion (and counting, 10,000 every second) on a war of choice...."
Here we have a problem that is a problem directly caused by Todd Stroger and his fellow political hacks, yet you somehow manage to rail against Republicans.
Does anyone know if there is a rally or march planned to protest this? This is an outrage!
I think we're forgetting the important issue here, which is that Lollapalooza was really a rockin' good time.
Here we have a problem that is a problem directly caused by Todd Stroger and his fellow political hacks, yet you somehow manage to rail against Republicans.
That's because health care funding is a national issue and if it weren't for Republicans we'd be much closer to a system that would freely provide these exams. Complaints about lack of funding in this country for most programs that protect the citizenry correspond directly to spending astronomical amounts of money on other pursuits, i.e. imperialist wars, duh... Ward Up.
Oh and since you missed it:
on the local level corrupt democrats enrich themselves at the expense of the citizenry
Ontology - I was agreeing with JuliaPorter's statement that health care is not a right by providing an source that argues that there is in fact no document, statute or declaration within the current scope of our government that affirms government-sponsored health care coverage as a universal right irrevoably held by all citizens. And since government-funded health care is a privilege, and not a right, it can be in good faith revoked at any time.
Navin - perhaps your mom could also lend you something to say towards this issue, other than the usual anti-American cheerleading. Your self-loathing cynicism impresses nobody.
Guest #2
Navin--
"we'd be much closer to a system that would freely provide these exams"
Except for the part where expensive medical procedures, well-trained professionals, logistics and information coordination magically becomes "free".
Can someone please explain to me why there isn't a law that says that when a hospital is named after you (or a family member), you and all of your family members (currently living or future ones) are required to obtain ALL of your medical care there AND there will be no VIP list for you?
If only Toddler and his family had to actually rely on Stroger Hospital (and it's outlying clinics) for their care, I highly doubt they'd be so quick to cancel services.
So many reasons to despise him and so little time . . .
WHOA.
I said this country believes that (or, more accurately, the politicians, I should've said), not that *I* do. Whether or not that's true is a matter of personal philosophy...I suppose, and how one feels about their fellow human beings.
Personally, I did not found Childrens Memorial Hospital 125 years ago so that people would be forced to go without health care.
You are right ... Government funded health care is no more a right than a clean public water supply, fire and police protection ...
It simply a requirement for a functioning society. To do anything less, is to completely subscribe to a dog-eat-dog model of society. Perhaps we should disband the police in favor of private security firms.
By not providing basic health care, we are effectively doing that. My insurence cost are higher because the hospitals that do provide emergency care (which they are required by law to provide) to the poor are treating the advanced problems at the most expensive point ....
Preventative and maintenance care is much cheaper for society, and keeps more of the population health and able to be employed
Navin - perhaps your mom could also lend you something to say towards this issue, other than the usual anti-American cheerleading. Your self-loathing cynicism impresses nobody.
Anonymous any-guest, The love it or leave it card impresses no one either. You might as well say that the author of this piece hates Chicago because she doesn't like Stroger. One could say the same about you for posting an article (which current health systems debunk) like that, after all aren't libertarians/rand worshippers not happy with the status quo? Or do they just hate America?
anonymous guest #14,
No more or less free than say the roads you drive on daily. Fact is universal care is cheaper and more effective than what we have now for everybody. What good is a luxury car if most of the population can't buy it? BTW I fully support your right to spend as much money as you want on your health care.
"You are right ... Government funded health care is no more a right than a clean public water supply, fire and police protection ...
It simply a requirement for a functioning society"
By that thought, society must not be functioning since we don't have universal healthcare.?- Your comparing apples to oranges.
Fish: Of course society can function and is functioning. Society functions under a variety of conditions, including total war.
The real questions are: Can society function better with better health care plans? What kind of society do we want to be, and how does health care fit into those visions? How important is the health of all our citizens to the functioning of our free-market society--that is, how do you balance the two, assuming you should.
Your sophistry is entertaining.
Please don't make the mistake, as many psuedo-conservatives do, of trying to figure out my position on govt funded health care. I just want to correct your rather weak logic.
guest 20; sorry to enter your presence without words of grandeur.
I find the argument fairly simple; aaronc implied that having universal healthcare is "a requirement for a functioning society". The logical argument that flows would be that; A functioning society is a society with universal healthcare; The U.S. does not have universal healthcare; therefore, the U.S. is not a functioning society.
Read into all you want, just keep your self loathing and academia philosophy in the university. Also look up Venn diagrams in the library.
And no, I will not respond to your baiting so you can continue to pat yourself on the back with verbage that gives long bearded professors orgasms.
I recommend remedial courses in ethics and the philosophical underpinnings of ethical choices in society if you're going to argue about rights, privileges, common good, etc.
I think Toddler should just give up the pretense that Cook County is providing health care and close everything.
Ferdy--
"I think Toddler should just give up the pretense that Cook County is providing health care and close everything."
That's the best idea I've heard all year. Seriously.
Well, fish, everyone has a right to be a moron, as you show.
What's a Venn diagram--that's one of the things with two circles shapes meeting at some point, right? Gee, thanks for the info.
And, finally, don't clean shaven professors cream over themselves as well?
God, you are seriously one of the dumbest posters on this board.
fishunderice likes throwing around syllogisms, they make his fallacies look pretty....
fallacious?...then prove them wrong
guest 25 likes likes to try and sound cute, they make his dick feel bigger
guest 24; God, seriously...it's like duh...
ouch!...stop hitting me....MOM!!...he's being mean again!
See ya, Chicagoist...err, I mean Craigslist
Too bad that Commissioner Claypool has yet to come up with one workable proposal for CC's structual budget deficit. One wonders if he actually favors privatization as a long range solution for Cook County heatlh services.
I'm truly bummed that apparently a comment citing Mr. Claypool's ardor for Ayn Rand was wiped. Does Forrest Claypool support privatizing county healthcare over the long term like his libertarian pals? Why is this not a reasonable topic for discussion when we're discussing the various factions in County government? After all, Forrest believes the marketplace can solve all ills, and that approach has some interesting ramifications for a whole passel of issues related to government. But don't take my word about Mr. Claypool's Randian ways, read his comment quoted in the Daily Southtown on Dec. 7, 2005 in response to a potential smoking ban in Cook County: "I think the marketplace has to determine this," said Forrest Claypool (D-Chicago). "A lot of consumers want to avoid smoking, and there are businesses that cater to them." Okey dokey!
Or maybe it's just ego. Forrest, after all, recently took credit (using the papal 'we' in his letter) for practically singlehandedly reforming the Juvenile Detention Center, despite the fact that it was Stroger who just hired in one of the nation's top juvenile justice authorities to run the place, Stroger who's administration has embraced the opportunity to turn the facility over to the Chief Judge, and Stroger who invited a series of audits that identified a range of accounting crap going on over there. (Chicago Tribune Commentary, September 11, 2007)
If every single job in every single office under Stroger's authority, including Stroger's, were eliminated, the County would wipe around $80 million from a deficit that still needs to find a way to pay for over $200 million in cost of living increases and union contracts that Forrest Claypool voted for, plus deal with a long-term structural deficit generated by the fact that the County's revenue stream grows each year by around a half of one percent, while inflation averages five times that amount and health care costs (which rise around 7.5%, thanks very much Squibb, Abbott, et al) grow at an even more astronomical rate each year.
Sometimes I tire of the old 'whip the Toddster some more' line on this site and yearn for dialogue a bit more substantive. It'd be great if somebody would consider giving Dick Devine a bit of grief, for example, for refusing to substitute high-priced administrative positions for the rank-and-file prosecutors he was perfectly happy to throw under the bus when it came time for his office to look for a way to match the cost-cutting of other elected officials. But that sop to Devine's patronage hires never seems to draw the ire of folks like Forrest. Maybe that's because he came up in the same sort of patronage operation himself, ala da mare.
Or maybe it's just a coincidence.