Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Don't Fall for Jimmy Kimmel's Cheap Zero-Sum Emotionalism

His political rants could be written by any liberal activist.

In recent months, late-night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel has taken to scaremongering his audience with well-worn Democratic Party talking points regarding health care insurance policy. Between yuks, he occasionally accuses Republicans of being would-be baby killers, which is treated as an important political development because, well, Jimmy Kimmel is famous.

This week, the comedian was back to explain why the new Graham-Cassidy Republican "repeal" bill is bad news. There were only two things wrong with his monologue: Almost everything he said was either completely untrue or highly misleading, and his simplistic emotional appeal was completely disconnected from the real world.

The comedian's interest in policy was sparked by the harrowing experience of having a newborn son who suffered from a rare health condition. Thankfully, his boy is OK. "If your baby is going to die and it doesn't have to, it shouldn't matter how much money you make," said an emotional Kimmel in May. "I think that's something that, whether you're a Republican or a Democrat or something else, we all agree on that, right?"

Yes, everyone agrees. As far as I know, there isn't a single politician in America who has ever supported allowing babies to die because they are born with birth defects, even if the parents can't pay. Not pre-Obamacare, and not post-Obamacare.

In any event, after Kimmel's May rant, Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy (R) showed up on his show to explain his position. These types of culture encounters shouldn't be dismissed, because the fact is most viewers are unaware of specific policies and have a notional understanding that's prejudiced by the establishment media's coverage. Cassidy came up with something he called the "Jimmy Kimmel Test," a test that no "family should be denied medical care, emergency or otherwise, because they can't afford it."

Kimmel claims that the new bill doesn't meet this threshold. "This guy, Bill Cassidy, just lied right to my face," the talk-show host said on Tuesday night during an extended political rant. He went on to say, "And by the way, before you post a nasty Facebook message saying I'm politicizing my son's health problems, I want you to know: I am politicizing my son's health problems." OK.

He explained: "Coverage for all? No. Fact, it will kick about 30 million Americans off insurance."

Not a single person would be "kicked off" his or her insurance. Rather, the Congressional Budget Office review of the AHCA found that of the 24 million Americans who would no longer have health insurance after an Obamacare repeal, 14 million would choose not to buy insurance in 2018 in the absence of a penalty. And if Obamacare were not repealed, the CBO projects another 6 million people would voluntarily leave the Obamacare markets. Now, if you don't believe Americans should be afforded the choice to leave or not buy insurance, just say that. No one is being kicked off.

Moreover, if Kimmel supports the individual mandate, Graham-Cassidy allows California to institute it—as I am sure it would.

Kimmel says: "Pre-existing conditions? Nope. If the bill passes, individual states can let insurance companies charge more if you have a pre-existing condition."

States would be allowed to apply for waivers to change what qualifies as an essential health benefit as long as they still preserve "adequate and affordable health insurance coverage" for people with pre-existing conditions. You may prefer price fixing to allowing states flexibility to try and fix these problems, but Graham-Cassidy does not break the "Jimmy Kimmel Test." Kimmel might not be aware that there is no plan in place that has government cutting checks after every surgery.

Kimmel then implored his audience to call Cassidy to stop the imaginary bill he had just described. It's a shame that Kimmel didn't provide a number to call for the tens of millions of Americans who have seen their premiums and out-of-pocket costs skyrocket under Obamacare's strictures. Is there no number available for those who are sick of being in exchanges that coerce them to buy plans they don't need that are sold by companies they don't like in fabricated, noncompetitive "markets" with dwindling choices?

Anyway, so went a monologue that could have been written by any liberal activist. Which is to say it was all about cheap zero-sum emotionalism. Kimmel doesn't believe Americans deserve the chance to reduce the cost of health care with market-based reforms on the state level, or in giving states any flexibility in catering their plans to their own citizens. Kimmel believes California and New York should spend more per capita and smaller states should suffer. Kimmel doesn't believe that individuals and families should be allowed to contribute to health savings accounts or use them to help pay ever-growing insurance premiums. Kimmel wants average Americans to suffer.

You see? Anyone can play this game.

COPYRIGHT 2017 CREATORS.COM

Photo Credit: ABC

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I saw a friend on Facebook telling us all to show ACA is working by signing up now, especially all us young people.

    I also saw them laughing at a person in a car accident who was asking for help with medical bills. This person previously had said that it didn't make sense for someone young like him to have expensive healthcare. There is perceived to be a contradiction here.

  • Telcontar the (Obama) Birther||

    "I also saw them laughing at a person in a car accident who was asking for help with medical bills"

    BUCS's Taste In Friends, status: JUDGED.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    When I made the original drunk post, I was hoping you'd show. You're my drunk posting friend.

  • Telcontar the (Obama) Birther||

    Telcontar's Judgment Of BUCS's Taste In Friends, status: CONFIRMED.

  • Arcxjo||

    It DOESN'T make sense for him to have Cadillac coverage. He needed a cheap catastrophic plan, which he might have been able to afford before 0care made his only option to pay several grand a month for the privilege of a five-figure deductible.

  • John Galt is back||

    Wrong. Age-rated would not have him paying a higher premium to subsidize lower premiums for older and wealthier Americans. Catastrophic health insurance only makes sense with a Healthcare Savings Account, and only for those willing to accept much greater personal risk.

  • abwrites||

    I wish there was a comprehensive report about those of us who were forced out of our insurance and into an ObamaCare plan -- I heard that we were being counted toward the "success" of the program.

    To explain: I am self-employed in California & the sole breadwinner of my family. I have 5 kids and pre-ACA I purchased a "catastrophic" plan for about $630/month for my family. I paid higher co-pays and prescriptions and had a $10K deductible, but annual physicals and immunizations were covered. Once I hit the deductible, they covered everything.

    Now? My premiums are over $2100 a month. My co-pay is only $5 less than with my previous plan. Prescriptions are the same or only dollars less. I still have a (nearly) $10K deductible, but I get bills for everything -- every time someone has a test or goes to the doctor, I get billed. I'm paying roughly $250-300/month and not going to the doctor any more than we had in the past. I checked my statement and NONE of those extra bills that I pay are being counted against my deductible. I've emailed my health provider and have not received a satisfactory response.

    I was one of those "special" people whose plan was cancelled and I was forced into an Obamacare plan. I think it's insane that I have to pay $25K a year for insurance PLUS huge co-pays, pay for labs, etc when I got almost the exact same benefits for less than $9K a year pre ACA.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    My guess is yes. I know for sure they count people who would rather not buy insurance but are obligated to now as a success.

  • sarcasmic||

    I'm in a similar situation. My employer stopped offering insurance that actually paid for stuff and replaced it with high deductible (catastrophic) plans. Except that these new plans cost the same or more than the ones that paid for stuff. So now I'm paying more for insurance that doesn't pay for anything, and putting several hundred dollars a month into an HSA. My out of pocket for health insurance and health care has literally doubled since the UnAffordable Care Act.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Your employer changing plans had nothing to do with Obamacare. As one of the people I know in my company HR confided in me, most employers took the opportunity to cut benefits and blame it on Obamacare because most people have no idea what it actually does and would believe the lie.

  • ThomasD||

    Wreckers! Hoarders! Kulaks!

    Tells us another story you got from old Uncle Joe.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Obamacare didn't effect employer insurance. It would have if the cadillac tax had gone into effect, but it never did. Anyone who says some change in their work insurance happened because of Obamacare is lying.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    I had a plan i liked that i bought outside of my employment, but had to go on my employer's slightly cheaper and much shittier plan because Obamacare made my plan illegal - does that count?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Yes it did. Government affected how health insurance companies had to have certain benefits, so employer health plans changed too.

    Stop lying lefty douche.

  • ThomasD||

    "Obamacare didn't effect employer insurance."

    Horse shit.

    The Obamacare employer mandate took effect on January 1, 2015. Starting on that date, "large employers" were required to provide 70% of their full-time equivalent employees and those employees' families with minimum essential healthcare insurance.

    https://tinyurl.com/ycvpzstw

    And just what legislation do you suppose defines 'minimum essential healthcare insurance'???

  • L.G. Balzac||

    "effect" is not a verb. "insurance" is not health care. Insurance for pre-existing conditions is an oxymoron.

  • L.G. Balzac||

    Socialists love free shit. That doesn't mean they are against someone else paying for it. That would be you.

  • Telcontar the (Obama) Birther||

    "'effect' is not a verb"

    Grammar-Juden detected; deploying Einsatzgruppen!

  • Telcontar the (Obama) Birther||

    Although Stormy DID use it in the wrong way... unless he meant that Obamacare *created* employer insurance.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    ACA exerts major impacts in the insurance market. Because it did not overtly target EGHPs in no way means it did not impact them.

    The majority of beneficiaries of ACA are those with expanded Medicaid [no cost to participants] and those whose premiums are almost totally subsidized so they pay around $80 a month for what would be a $750 policy with very high deductibles and co-pays. No one who doesn't qualify for these is willing to pay for ACA at face cost. It is government subsidized health care for the poor, and everyone else is paying for it. Including people with EGHPs.

  • Sevo||

    Stormy Dragon|9.22.17 @ 10:27AM|#
    "Obamacare didn't effect employer insurance."

    Says a stupid sack of shit.
    What an imbecile. Did you practice, or where your born this stupid?

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    Skip your hate-spewing insults and tell us how.
    Can you post ANYTHING of substance?

  • Mark22||

    First of all, ACA imposes lots of requirements on employer-provided health coverage.

    Furthermore, businesses react to anticipated economic conditions, not actual economic conditions. My company planned for the cadillac tax long as soon as it was announced. The same is true for many other provisions of the ACA.

    In different words, you are a liar.

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    Try again..

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Try a different sock-puppet, Hihn-tard.

  • BYODB||

    Please, tell me more about how it's employers fault when all plans pre-ACA were outlawed overnight and mandated to have MORE benefits as a BASELINE of coverage.

    Idiot.

  • Sevo||

    Stormy Dragon|9.22.17 @ 10:15AM|#
    "Your employer changing plans had nothing to do with Obamacare."

    Oh, no! It had to do with, uh,
    What a fucking imbecile.

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    Behold the deep thinkers!

    BYODB |9.22.17 @ 12:17PM|#
    Idiot.

    Sevo|9.24.17 @ 12:23AM|#
    What a fucking imbecile.
  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Hihn-sano thinks he's fooling people with his sock puppet. Use John Galt II for the next one, goofy!

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    Behold the "deep thinkers!"

    BYODB |9.22.17 @ 12:17PM|#
    Idiot.

    Sevo|9.24.17 @ 12:23AM|#
    What a fucking imbecile

    Red Rocks White Privilege|9.24.17 @ 9:29AM|#
    Dumbfuck

    PROUD to be cyber-thugs!!

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Captain Hihn-sano, PROUD to be a mewling pussy!

  • Michael Hihn||

    NOW my stalker says that ONLY a "mewling pussy" would COUNTERATTACK aggressors ... IN BOLDFACE!! (snort)

    As I just did AGAIN to him. ... which is why he's been stalking me for five months.

    All they EVER do is launch aggression.
    PROUD TO BE A CYBER-THUG! . Hear him grunt!!

    Haters gotta hate. Bullies gotta bully,

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Dumbfuck Captain Hihn-sano has his nurse remind him not to shitpost under his sockpuppet!

  • John Galt is back||

    AGAIN all attack and ZERO content

    Hihn-sano has his nurse remind him not to shitpost under his sockpuppet!

    Haters gotta hate.
    Pity the fools. They can't help it. Their parents raised them to be PROUD of having no conscience.
    Bullies and stalkers. The militant self-righteous.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Hihn-sano shitposting under another sockpuppet because he can't take mean words--just like a prissy SJW bitch.

  • David Nolan||

    AGAIN
    1) ALL personal attack, ZERO substance
    2) Shoots himself in the foot again -- ADMITS aggression! (OMG)

    he can't take mean words

    (snort) Pay attention, chump.
    MEAN WORDS ARE AGGRESSION -- IF UNPROVOKED ATTACKS

    just like a prissy SJW bitch

    In the land of assholes and bullies ....
    Calling out aggression can ONLY be a prissy SJW bitch ... Because victimhood. .
    You been robbed? Only a prissy SJW bitch calls the cops
    Assaulted and mugged? Don't be a prissy SJW bitch
    The right of self-defense is ONLY claimed by prissy SJW bitches.
    FUCK the Non-Aggression Principle. Bullies have an INHERENT RIGHT to commit aggression. SHUT THE FUCK UP.AND SUBMIT ...you prissy self-righteous bitches,

    He's stalking me for months, BECAUSE I ridicule his wackiness. THIS aggression began here:
    http://reason.com/archives/201.....nt_6974394

    Attack. Attack. Attack. No matter he makes a fool of himself. Haters gotta hate.
    Pity the fools. They can't help it. Their parents raised them to be PROUD of having no conscience. Bullies and stalkers. The militant self-righteous.
    It's ALL about hatred and bullying

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Get off your cross, Hihn-tard, somebody needs the wood.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    And fucking LOL at you using another sock-puppet. Get your nurse to keep your spoofing straight, dummy.

  • David Nolan||

    MOAR AGGRESSION!

    Attack. Attack. Attack. Haters gotta hate. They can't help it. Their parents raised them to be PROUD of having no conscience. Bullies and stalkers. The militant self-righteous

    Get your nurse to keep your spoofing straight, dummy.

    Like a 12-year-old (sneer)

  • David Nolan||

    MOAR AGGRESSION!

    Attack. Attack. Attack. Haters gotta hate. They can't help it. Their parents raised them to be PROUD of having no conscience. Bullies and stalkers. The militant self-righteous

    Get off your cross, Hihn-tard, somebody needs the wood.
  • KevinP||

    Same here. My wife and I had a pre-ACA plan for $2,400 per year in 2012. In 2017? $11,000 per year! And everything is worse. The deductible, the doctors, the hospitals is all worse.

    If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.

  • Michael Hihn||

    One does not have to sup[port Obamacare to know you are totally full of shit.

    ONLY AN IGNORANT DUMBFUCK WOULD BELIEVE YOU BOUGHT HEALTH INSURANCE FOR TWO -- IN THE NON-GROUP MARKET .,. AT $200 PER MONTH!

    Group premiums were higher for a single person.

  • ThomasD||

    My experience was similar.

    Out of pocket expenses went up (which I'm alright with because, IMO, it is the only way we rein in spending.)

    But my payments also went up. Clearly that added money is not for my benefit.

    And whether it was Obamacare's added mandates or Obamcare being an excuse really does not matter.

    Because either way Obamacare is the proximal cause for the changes.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Not a single person would be "kicked off" his or her insurance.

    Pathetic fucking liar.

    Rather, the Congressional Budget Office review of the AHCA found that of the 24 million Americans who could no longer have health insurance after an Obamacare repeal

    Wrong bill, Sparky. CBO cannot judge THIS bill, which leaves you just another rightwing goober spouting bullshit,

    Trump's ass-kisser also ignores the dollars taken from (mostly blue) states who enacted the Medicaid expansion, and given to (mostly red) states who did not. For dullards, red states get money that blue states earned.

    And elementary math. Repealing the mandate, but KEEPING guaranteed issue ---- aka political cowardice -- is GUARANTEED to accelerate the Obamacare death spiral. The mandate adds healthy people, to offset the higher risk of "selling fire insurance on a burning house" -- DUH.,

    Kimmel doesn't believe Americans deserve the chance to reduce the cost of health care

    Now you've got the wrong topic -- on top of citing the wrong bill.

    Harsanyi needs to learn about free market OUTCOMES -- universal treatment, regardless of income, through non profits and charities. He confuses coverage with treatment, babbles free market slogans ... while rejecting free market OUTCOMES!

    Right - Left = Zero

  • KevinP||

    Feel the rage. Let it flow.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Feel the rage. Let it flow.

    See the lack of content. Let it spew,

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    See the lack of alimony payments. Let it deadbeat.

  • Michael Hihn||

    ANOTHER progtard opposes total repeal of Medicaid ... on a libertarian website. Sad.

  • Paloma||

    Health care is RIDICULOUSLY expensive in this country. The only reason anyone buys insurance is because they can't afford ordinary health care without it. So what's the Dems' solution for people who can't afford health care? Force them to buy insurance. If they can't afford ordinary health care how are they supposed to afford insurance? And if they can't afford insurance, how are they supposed to afford a fine?

  • L.G. Balzac||

    +1 Nice grammar, too.
    Why do Dems want to help evil Insurance CORPORATIONS get richer? A MANDATE to be a customer of an Insurance corporation written into Federal law? Sounds like "InsuranceCare".

  • abwrites||

    I think health care (not insurance) is expensive because of the huge amount of fraud in the insurance system. If we all paid out of pocket, costs would go down. There were times when I was in the catastrophic plan when I asked what the cost was if I paid cash (not processing through insurance) -- and universally, it was 40-60% cheaper than what is charged to the insurance (which I would then have to pay part.)

    I think everyone is to blame: individuals who abuse the system and increase the costs because they don't pay out of pocket and don't "see" the costs; fraud among those who over-charge/bill; insurance companies who often make arbitrary decisions (it seems); the politicians for putting band-aids on every problem; pharmaceutical companies who often artificially increase the price of drugs BECAUSE the government is forcing insurance to pay for it. The free market could sort this all out and, ultimately, reduce costs -- and charities and non-profits can help those who truly can not afford care. IMO.

  • Sevo||

    abwrites|9.22.17 @ 1:18PM|#
    "I think health care (not insurance) is expensive because of the huge amount of fraud in the insurance system. If we all paid out of pocket, costs would go down.

    Non-sequitur.

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    Non-sequitur.

    (lol)

  • Michael Hihn||

    So what's the Dems' solution for people who can't afford health care?

    Nice tribal rant, but the GOP is just as And the libertarian establishment.

    Can wingers be as wacky as progs?

    1) "If they can't afford ordinary health care how are they supposed to afford insurance?"
    The fine is stupid, but so are you, since it's a small fraction. of the insurance cost.

    2) "If they can't afford ordinary health care how are they supposed to afford insurance?"
    IF THEY "CAN'T AFFORD TO REPLACE A STOLEN CAR, HOW CAN THEY AFFORD AUTO INSURANCE?

    Did you SEE the free-market solution they ALL miss?

  • Paloma||

    If the insurance premiums are more than the cost of fixing the car, they buy another car. Why force people to buy any product? If it benefited them, they wouldn't have to be coerced.

  • Michael Hihn||

    If the insurance premiums are more than the cost of fixing the car, they buy another car.

    Which is my point -- since that's IMPOSSIBLE.
    Do you know how insurance works?

    Did you SEE the free-market solution they ALL miss

    Why force people to buy any product? If it benefited them, they wouldn't have to be coerced.

    You missed it too.

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    What do you know about insurance premiums? My parents were paying for ours.

  • Michael Hihn||

    YOU missed it too!

  • Microaggressor||

    Reduced cost is a free market outcome. Take your meds, Mike.

  • Michael Hihn||

    SEE the goober! (Microaggressor)

    Harsanyi needs to learn about free market OUTCOMES -- universal treatment, regardless of income, through non profits and charities

    Reduced cost is a free market outcome.

    COWARDLY EVASION!!!

    Take your meds, Mike.

    (smirk) Bend over, this will go up your ass easier.
    I say REPEAL Medicaid .... you defend keeping it, ON A libertarian website!!

    (But he's NOT a brainwashed goober!)

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    Well you'd be the expert about shoving things in your ass. Or did your forget about the hundred of dollars worth of my cosmetics you destroyed, because you couldn't control yourself in the bathroom around any container that was longer than wide?

    Pretty sure I remember you crying about it when presented in court.

  • Sevo||

    You shouldn't mention that in public.
    Slobbering old assholes like Mike deserve SOME privacy, even when they post publicly and make their imbecility clear to all.

  • damikesc||

    Harsanyi needs to learn about free market OUTCOMES -- universal treatment, regardless of income, through non profits and charities. He confuses coverage with treatment, babbles free market slogans ... while rejecting free market OUTCOMES!

    Didn't the non-profit insurance co-ops tank first under Obamacare?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Didn't the non-profit insurance co-ops tank first under Obamacare?

    (snort) INSURANCE co-ops are not what was proposed … and NOT what he had. You goobers are as easily brainwashed as Berniebots

    Pay attention. Republicans REFUSED an Obamacare deal for HEALTHCARE co-ops ... as an ALTERNATIVE to a public option!... HEALTHCARE IS NOT INSURANCE!!! (See, he's precisely as confused as proggies, on treatment vs coverage.).

    Pay attention. The alternative ... accepted by Obama as an alternative to a public option -- was based on Seattle's Group Health Co-op -- a Co-Op HMO --- owned and controlled by members.

    Do the math. Doctors are SALARIED employees of their patients. The run their own hospitals and pharmacy. NO reimbursement costs, CHEAPER than any gubmint plan on earth -- AND NO MONOPOLY (GHC has a lower-cost competitor)

    Why did the GOP refuse the deal, which would have KILLED single-payer, forcing Obama to his far left? GOP worked with Kennedy on tax cuts ... which were STRONGLY opposed by his own far left, the AFL-CIO, etc.

    Now learn how badly you've been brainwashed – no better than a Berniebot

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    I don't remember you being so political before my affair.

    However I do remember the conversational style.

    God forbid if I mentioned not being fussed over the Hunger Games.
    Or Dragonball Z.

    Or about wiping your boogers onto your socks.

  • BYODB||

    Equal parts right on truth and complete raving madness. At least in this instance, Hihn is half right.

    Frankly, the mandate was never going to offset guaranteed issue. Ever. Nothing can.

  • Michael Hihn||

    ANOTHER tribal goober!!

    "Repealing the mandate, but KEEPING guaranteed issue ---- aka political cowardice -- is GUARANTEED to accelerate the Obamacare death spiral. The mandate adds healthy people, to offset the higher risk of "selling fire insurance on a burning house" -- DUH.,"

    Frankly, the mandate was never going to offset guaranteed issue.

    NON-RESPONSIVE. One more time:
    Repealing the mandate means LESS OFFSET of the losses!
    THAT'S HIGHER NET LOSSES ... AN EVER WORSE DEATH SPIRAL
    Just as eagerly brainwashed as Berniebots,

  • XM||

    OMG, before the ACA, why didn't the insurance pool enter the DREADED death spiral? People weren't even forced to buy insurance!

    Could it be..... cheaper plans were available? More choices? Insurance companies weren't forced to sell high end product that covered a lot of expensive "essential benefits", necessitating a flood of younger people to enter the pool and pay for the sick who can drive up costs for everyone else?

    ACA distorted the market, but Mike seems happy to keep in place the mechanism that does exactly that.

  • Michael Hihn||

    OMG, before the ACA, why didn't the insurance pool enter the DREADED death spiral?

    Ummm. THERE WAS NO GUARANTEED ISSUE (pre-existing conditions)!

    Could it be..... cheaper plans were available? More choices?

    Not the death spiral!

    Insurance companies weren't forced to sell high end product that covered a lot of expensive "essential benefits", necessitating a flood of younger people to enter the pool and pay for the sick who can drive up costs for everyone else?

    Umm, no. It was guaranteed issue, which added tens of millions of sick people, and/or repealed higher premiums on higher risks.

    Insurance companies were FORCED to sell health insurance to sick people at the SAME premium as healthy people … WHICH YOU JUST DEFENDED!!! ( because the GOP would KEEP it.)
    YOU deny any negative effect on homeowner premiums ...from selling fire insurance on a burning house

    ACA distorted the market, but Mike seems happy to keep in place the mechanism that does exactly that

    OMG blames ME for HIS own ignorance!. It's the COMBINATION of guaranteed issue + no mandate that GUARANTEES an even worse death spiral
    Elementary school math: same number of sick people - fewer healthy ones = higher risk.(and higher premiums) than Obamacare.

    YOUR team is promising MORE free stuff than Obamacare!!!
    Left-Right=Zero

    Anything else?

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    Why is everything always somebody else's responsibility?

    How come you never want to pay for your own conscience and morals?

    How can you sit on the computer wasting your life moralizing, arguing with anonymous people over petty stuff, rather than getting off your own lazy ass and volunteering your time at clinics and centers for the poor?

    How do you even have the time? Well I guess you've got a lot more 'leisure' time now, on your own.

    Funny, it's really all the little things I'd been missing out on. Like someone who can open jars. Wow. That alone changed my world. Never knew how badly I had missed pickles.

  • Sevo||

    Mike deserves this, AND it's funny! Keep it up.

  • Hateful Reactionary||

    What drugs is Hihn on? Thorazine?

  • BYODB||

    Honestly, asking what drugs he isn't on is a shorter list I suspect. Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course. Hihn is, of course, the only true Libertarian since I'm fairly confident he predates Libertarianism along with hominids and vertebrates.

  • Michael Hihn||

    TWICE!
    BYODB opposes total repeal of Medicaid TWICE ... and defends KEEPING Medicaid, on a libertarian website! ALL STATISTS ARE BULLIES (SNEER)

    Hihn is, of course, the only true Libertarian

    DOES HE REALLY BELIEVE I'M THE ONLY LIBERTARIAN WHO HAS KNOWN HOW TO TOTALLY REPEAL OF MEDICAID ... SINCE THE 1970s?

    Goobers hate government.
    Libertarians love liberty,

    For the mentally impaired
    1) Increasing liberty always limits or reduces government.
    2) Shrinking government DOES NOT always means increasing liberty, or restoring free markets, -- as we see PROVEN with Medicaid,

    I'm fairly confident he predates Libertarianism along with hominids and vertebrates.

    Wipe the drool from your chin, Medicaid lover.

  • Subpoena'd Woodchipper||

    Not sure who has more liquid on their face: the person you accuse of having drool on their face or the person you are "speaking" to, who has your spittle all over their face from your raving rants. Before you even hit submit, we all know you are more libertarian than any of us. So libertarian in fact, you should be the de facto leader of the party.

    You've known how to repeal Medicaid since the 1970's but it hasn't happened yet. Do you think it's possible that your overall demeanor, and shitty attitude have anything to do with why? Or why you have no friends?

  • Michael Hihn||

    You've known how to repeal Medicaid since the 1970's but it hasn't happened yet.

    Cut the bullshit, Why do defend keeping Medicaid?

  • Sevo||

    "What drugs is Hihn on? Thorazine?"

    Pretty sure it's a new one called Stupid.

  • XM||

    Meanwhile in the real world, the CBO (as David points out) have consistently projected Americans will voluntarily drop their coverage once the individual mandate is weakened or dropped altogether, which is NOT the same thing as losing coverage. No one is kicked out.

    Any bill that even touches the individual mandate = many people will drop out of the insurance pool.

    The mandate is arguably unconstitutional, and the notion that the government can force you to buy products (not the equivalent of safety belt requirements) is deeply unlibertarian. The only fake libertarian is you, old man.

  • Michael Hihn||

    the CBO (as David points out)

    Umm, that was the wrong bill. I see he fooled you!

  • Get To Da Chippah||

    Rather, the Congressional Budget Office review of the AHCA found that of the 24 million Americans who could no longer have health insurance after an Obamacare repeal

    Wrong bill, Sparky. CBO cannot judge THIS bill, which leaves you just another rightwing goober spouting bullshit,

    Of course, noted health insurance expert Jimmy Kimmel can state with assertion that the bill the CBO cannot possibly score in time will kick 30 million people off their health insurance, and Hihn takes a deep sniff of that pile of bullshit and calls it a bouquet of roses. Meanwhile, Harsanyi knows he can't score this bill, so he instead clearly refers back to one that was already scored, one that by all appearances looks highly similar to the current proposal, and HE ACCURATELY NOTES THE BILL TO WHICH HE'S REFERRING.

  • Michael Hihn||

    ANOTHER BLOWHARD

    Wrong bill, Sparky. CBO cannot judge THIS bill, which leaves you just another rightwing goober spouting bullshit,

    Of course, noted health insurance expert Jimmy Kimmel .....

    BLAH, BLAH, BLAH
    How does that excuse Harsanyi's shameful lie?

    and Hihn takes a deep sniff of that pile of bullshit and calls it a bouquet of roses.

    (smirk)

    Meanwhile, Harsanyi knows he can't score this bill, so he instead clearly refers back to one that was already scored, one that by all appearances looks highly similar to the current proposal

    Dumbass says the two bills are "highly similar"
    Move along folks, There's nothing here

    Left-Right=Zero

  • ||

    So first off, the GOP definitely wants to leave out to dry on killing the ACA.

    Second off, we shouldn't dismiss Kimmel's support of ACA like this. ACA is REALLY popular. I have a lot of complaints about it but we're just not going to convince anyone by insisting "yeah you like it but actually it's shit."

  • Michael Hihn||

    we shouldn't dismiss Kimmel's support of ACA like this.

    That's not what he's doing,

  • Conchfritters||

    ....but we're just not going to convince anyone by insisting "yeah you like it but actually it's shit."

    Amen - - leave the ACA alone and allow it to collapse by itself. Let's see how the people are better off when the thing is a smoldering ruin. I think the bean counters said it would be another 18 months or so. Show the people how great socialism is when their copper or bronze insurance is $40,000 a year, and they go in for one annual checkup, and maybe a flu shot in November.

  • L.G. Balzac||

    The IRS administering fines for not buying an insurance policy should be the first thing to be eliminated. The rest will take care of itself.

  • BYODB||

    Who cares, the fine is way less than the yearly price of the insurance you would be forced to buy with or without subsidy.

  • ||

    Give it time, it increases.

  • Michael Hihn||

    The IRS administering fines for not buying an insurance policy should be the first thing to be eliminated. The rest will take care of itself.

    YOU WANT EVEN WORSE SKYROCKETING OF PREMIUMS

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    YOU WANT SOMEONE TO CHANGE YOUR DEPENDS FOR YOU

  • Sevo||

    "ACA is REALLY popular."
    Among D congress critters.

  • Paloma||

    It's hardly popular. Most people hate it. They just hate what's replacing it more.

  • BYODB||

    They hate it even while they don't understand it, much like how they hate what might replace it without understanding it either. At least, that seems accurate for most people I talk to.

    What's important is the reason why they hate it. If you ask people, most of them probably can't give you a meaningful answer or they will give you an appeal to emotion rooted in fallacy. If the reason why they hate it involves 'it isn't generous enough' they are an idiot.

  • ||

    Exactly this. I have a hard time defending the ACA replacement bills because they ARE worse than the ACA. But that doesn't mean the ACA is good.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Behold the brainwashed trial goobers.
    52% of Americans now support Obamacare ...but ONLY since they saw that the right has NO alternative.

    So the goobers come here, hug each other for comfort ... and exchange meaningless slogans

    Elementary truth for the mentally impaired,
    1) Americans have ALWAYS been willing to pay for universal treatment for the uninsured ...regardless of income ..through private charity before Medicaid.

    2) Today's conservatives and libertarians have NO CLUE how to restore a TRUE free market ..,. they BELEEB hating gubmint is more important.

    3) If they can't provide what the vast majority of people want, on a free market ... then government has the ONLY acceptable alternative. (Indeed, all of humanity has done it since the 1500s, but that requires intelligence)

    It's called "Consent of the Governed." And it trumps all the Bellowing Blowhards screeching slogans, on principles they cannot begin to grasp, an markets they don't understand.
    So ... who are the authoritarians? (lol)

  • Conchfritters||

    Jimmy sucks, late night sucks. I actually liked Colbert when he was on Comedy Central pretending to be Bill O'Reilly each night - - the show today with him being himself isn't that funny. I'm seriously tempted to buy the Johnny Carson box set they sell on late night informercials because the shit they have on late night today fucking blows.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    It's not just late night, the I long for the days of Kimmel and Carola on the Man Show. I watched 5 minutes if the Orville last night and wanted to puke. Definitely a market opportunity for better entertainment.

  • ThomasD||

    Ditto. Watched it on the advice of a family member.

    Not impressed.

    The whole world is just phoning it in these days.

  • BYODB||

    Watched the first episode of 'The Orville', there were two amusing moments but it follows a family sit-com structure rather than a sci-fi structure which is...about what I would expect from Seth Macfarlane. I think he has maybe half a dozen jokes that simply get rewritten a thousand times. That, and clearly the 'edge' factor on that show is going to be a negative value.

  • ||

    Times were simpler when the Man Show was around. Girls on trampolines, old dudes chugging beers, 12 year old kids playing "Hey mister!" in front of liquor stores... Now guys cannot look at boobs, chugging beers is rape culture, and it is way too dangerous to have a kid ask people for booze as part of a tv skit.

    Jimmy Kimmel is now telling me about government healthcare insurance schemes... err policies. Sometimes I look at Jimmy and think, what happened to you?

  • L.G. Balzac||

    "Sometimes I look at Jimmy and think, what happened to you?"
    Jimmy who?

  • Ska||

    Late night is for Adult Swim and Archer reruns.

  • Mrs. Premise||

    Trump's win has ruined late night comedy for me. Still better the fawning over Hillary that would be going on instead.

  • Rockabilly||

    Jimmy was funny on the Man Show. Adam is still funny on his podcasts. Jimmy, however, has turned into a bitter old champagne socialist nut job who thinks the government should control your life.

  • p3orion||

    But the parties Jimmy gets invited to are so much better, and he gets to see his name mentioned approvingly in the New York Times!

  • ThomasD||

    I doubt most celebutards give this any real thought. Kimmel, like the rest, enjoys his current position in the Hollywood gulag, so he sucks up and kisses the asses that he thinks will keep him relevant/employed.

    Because these people are far too in lockstep for it to be any other way.

  • ||

    He was literally on TV bragging about how he is in the Hollywood elite and how some GOPer would never be invited into the Hollywood elite. He said it as a joke, but there was no punch line. It was then and there I realized whatever was left of the Man Show Jimmy Kimmel is dead.

  • Microaggressor||

    So the cocktail parties are real!

  • J Mann||

    Adam's still funny, but he does repeat himself a lot.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Jimmy, however, has turned into a bitter old champagne socialist nut job who thinks the government should control your life.

    I suspect whatever testosterone and sense of personal responsibility he once possessed was leeched out by Sarah Silverman when they were dating.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Jimmy, however, has turned into a bitter old champagne socialist nut job who thinks the government should control your life.

    Pay attention, chump. He SUPPORTED the "Kimmil Test" .. as proposed by Cassidy,
    Does that make you a bitter old beer fascist?

  • Crusty Juggler - Lawbertarian||

    Late night comedy: it's not just comedy, it's politics!

    Ugh. Stop.

  • Mrs. Premise||

    Everybody wants to be Jon Stewart. I would prefer they be Craig Kilborn. Or Craig Ferguson, for that matter.

  • steve walsh||

    Jimmy Kimmel has a child born with a life-threatening health condition and so becomes an expert on healthcare and health insurance. Got it.

  • ||

    Trump is duly elected over the course of several months, over the opposition of a score of seasoned politicians and despite consistent iterative movements to stop him at most every turn.

    Jimmy Kimmel's kid has a life-threatening condition that's readily and affordably treatable and everybody should just take his words and do their damnedest to convert it to policy.

    Fuck Kimmel, I'd say he should go write a song like Tears In Heaven or All of My Love to sing himself to sleep at night except his kid's alive and you're nowhere near that talented.

  • ||

    He's nowhere near that talented.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Internet libertarianism. Where "haha, your kid is still alive" is considered a total burn.

  • ||

    Talk about missing the point .

    Internet socialism. Where missing the point is the argument.

  • WinstonV||

    It's not rocket science, and when it directly affects you intelligent folks can become quite the expert. Because it directly affected someone I cared about, I became an expert in a certain type of cancer. I could tell you pretty much everything known by 99% of the medical community. Your shooting the messenger with an argument like this is intellectual malpractice.

  • damikesc||

    Except he's pimping Obamacare when he, himself, does not use it at all.

    He doesn't know shit about Obamacare.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Except he's pimping Obamacare when he, himself, does not use it at all.

    MOAR pathetic bullshit,

    He doesn't know shit about Obamacare.

    More than you do.,

  • Mickey Rat||

    Having an emotional stake in something does not necessarily make your opinion correct. It may, in fact, be reason to suspect your objectivity.

  • Mrs. Premise||

    My father was murdered- therefore, I feel I should be in charge of designing a capital punishment policy for the whole country.

  • Michael Hihn||

    That's even worse than Mickey's!

    What if a US Senator lied about your father's murder, to exploit the tragedy for personal political gain? I suspect most children would get pissed about that. Would you?

    Likewise, I suspect most parents would be as pissed as Kimmel -- if a shitbag politician had tried to exploit a life-threatening event for their newborn. Unless the parent is a wacko who ranks tribal hatred above the life of their own newborn, of which there are (sadly) many.. Are you a patent? If so, which type?

  • L.G. Balzac||

    "I could tell you pretty much everything known by 99% of the medical community."
    You don't really believe this. But suggesting people should understand a subject before giving others advice, puts you in agreement with most posters here.

  • ||

    You don't really believe this.

    He may and he may not be wrong. The key difference, though, is that when you contract a disease and bone up on all the research and get abreast of the medical community, it does little to put you ahead of the insurance, legal, and moral communities, etc.

    Kimmel may, at this point, be a bona fide heart surgeon capable of reconstructing his own son's heart. Unfortunately as 99% of the rest of humanity (both laymen and experts) can tell you, unless he's actually employed by a hospital to do the work, it means fuck all with regard to Obamacare.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    Even if he's actually employed by a hospital to do the work, it still means fuck all with regard to Obamacare. I don't expect my doctor (or even a non-licensed bona fide heart surgeon capable of reconstructing his own son's heart) to understand fuck all regarding costs, insurance, billing, or Obamacare. I expect my doctor to worry about medicine, and members of his office staff and my insurance company to worry about everything else.

  • Mickey Rat||

    Is that not similar to how Jenny McCarthy became an expert on autism causing vaccines?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Mickey Rat|9.22.17 @ 11:08AM|#
    Is that not similar to how Jenny McCarthy became an expert on autism causing vaccines?

    Like that champion of dumbfuckery, Rand Paul?
    Ooops.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Jimmy Kimmel has a child born with a life-threatening health condition and so becomes an expert on healthcare and health insurance. Got it.

    Obviously NOT,
    And Cassidy agreed with him!
    Try again

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    I, for one, disagree that all babies should be preserved at any cost. I don't know what the right cost is, but there is a line somewhere that says enough. The same with old farts like me. We could extend everyone's life by 10-20 years with expensive surgeries and drugs, but the cost would be astronomical. Who foots the bill when the individual can't pay and may not be a net contributor in the future?

  • Sevo||

    Marcus Aurelius|9.22.17 @ 10:01AM|#
    "I, for one, disagree that all babies should be preserved at any cost. I don't know what the right cost is, but there is a line somewhere that says enough."

    I'd rather that cost be determined by those paying it rather than a bureaucrat. Or an un-funny comic.

  • sarcasmic||

    We could extend everyone's life by 10-20 years with expensive surgeries and drugs, but the cost would be astronomical.

    Um, that's exactly what is happening right now.

  • BYODB||

    No one pays, they are left to die as the surgery/life saving medication is a limited good thus your future projected valued to society is what determines if you will receive care.

    Obviously, a 90 year senator who needs a new heart would take precedence over a mentally challenged 15 year old who needs the same because the Senator is 'more important' and is ultimately in control over the money that pays for healthcare.

    This is such a well know truism that you need to be willfully stupid to think otherwise. Nationalized Healthcare is the ultimate in utilitarian considerations and corruption where only the proles truly suffer.

    If you have the 'right' to someone's education and services, but there is no one to provide them, what good does that 'right' do you exactly? 'Healthcare' does not exist in nature.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Not a single person would be "kicked off" his or her insurance. Rather, the Congressional Budget Office review of the AHCA found that of the 24 million Americans who would no longer have health insurance after an Obamacare repeal, 14 million would choose not to buy insurance in 2018 in the absence of a penalty. And if Obamacare were not repealed, the CBO projects another 6 million people would voluntarily leave the Obamacare markets. Now, if you don't believe Americans should be afforded the choice to leave or not buy insurance, just say that. No one is being kicked off.

    A utilitarian argument looking at the negatives of government healthcare and arguing the exceed the benefits would be something. A moral argument that even if government healthcare were a net benefit that it's wrong to take money by force to finance it would be something.

    Instead we get bullshit arguments that everything will be candy canes and unicorns that are so mendacious it makes it sound like even libertarians don't really believe what they say. Do you seriously think that 14 million is actively wants to not have coverage and is excitedly looking forward to the opportunity?

  • damikesc||

    Do you seriously think that 14 million is actively wants to not have coverage and is excitedly looking forward to the opportunity?

    But a lot of people who have "insurance" under Obamacare have a policy that doesn't actually cover anything. Insane premiums AND deductibles. How is an insurance that costs so much it is unusable any better than no insurance?

  • Paloma||

    It can be worse because you're paying for something you can't use when you could use the money elsewhere. It's like being forced to pay sky high car insurance premiums for Fred Flintstone's car.

  • ||

    "Do you seriously think that 14 million is actively wants to not have coverage and is excitedly looking forward to the opportunity?"

    YES! They would rather spend their money elsewhere and pay as needed.

    That's not a hard concept buddy.

  • WoodChipperBob||

    What they actively want is to spend their money on something else, rather than paying for "coverage" which doesn't actually provide them a benefit commensurate with the cost.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Why is this idiot given so much credence?

  • Citizen X - #6||

    You know the saying "the squeaky wheel gets the grease"? For "grease," substitute "Facebook likes from simple folks."

  • Crying Zelda Morning Link||

    Agreed, I don't know why they continue to publish Harsanyi when all he does is bitch about the low hanging fruit in the media.

    Also, Kimmel's a moron.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Why is this idiot given so much credence?

    He's correct. Cassidy lied to his face.
    So that leaves you with zero credibility,

  • Think It Through||

    "Not a single person would be "kicked off" his or her insurance.... of the 24 million Americans who would no longer have health insurance after an Obamacare repeal, 14 million would choose not to buy insurance in 2018 in the absence of a penalty. And if Obamacare were not repealed, the CBO projects another 6 million people would voluntarily leave the Obamacare markets."

    Something's off with the math or logic here. If 14m voluntarily leave, what's the story with the other 10m? And without accounting for them, how do you conclude "not a single person would be kicked off"?

    Not trying to make a point, actually asking. Something's missing here.

  • Michael Hihn||

    They're eager to be brainwashed. Like the Berniebots,
    Left-Right=Zero.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Who is this Jimmy Kimmel? Must be a lefty nobody.

  • ||

    When I was 11ish he was the host of this show called The Man Show and Jimmy Kimmel was the co-host. Every episode they would show girls in bikinis jumping on trampolines and all chug their beers at the end of the episode. I felt more like a man by watching the show. Now when I see Jimmy Kimmel, I see a whiny, condescending, smug jerk that he would have been making fun of 15 years ago.

  • damikesc||

    When Adam Carolla left and Jimmy stayed on, the Man Show became appreciably worse.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Adam and Jimmy both left The Man Show at the same time and were replaced with Seth Rogan and Doug Stanhope.

    But thanks for more "facts I completly made up because they'd be real convenient for my argument if they were true".

  • damikesc||

    I remembered Stanhope. Didn't remember Rogan. I'm assuming fucking the well-used pussy of Sarah Silverman killed off whatever humor he once had.

  • Think It Through||

    Speaking of fake news, Joe Rogan. Not Seth Rogan.

  • ||

    When Adam Carolla left and Jimmy stayed on, the Man Show became appreciably worse.

    Jimmy Kimmel and Ben Stein jointly played the part of Alex Trebek on Stein's game show and it was never entirely clear who was the straight man.

    Jimmy Kimmel, as a comedian, is about as entertaining as an Ivy League lawyer.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Jimmy Kimmel, as a comedian, is about as entertaining as an Ivy League lawyer.

    How big is YOUR audience?

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    It's funny you didn't agree not so long ago when I said 'size mattered'.

    I also remember Mr. Comicbook here cancelling our plans to see that Thor movie,
    after my sister kept raving about seeing him shirtless.

  • WinstonV||

    Let's take your argument to its logical conclusion. Only people who can afford and want to buy health insurance should do so. Everyone else can just fly naked. Our current laws generally that no one can be turned away if they need healthcare so providers have to provide. They chase the non-insured to pay their bills but if they can't collect from them, they simply charge the insured patients more unnecessary fees to make up for what they can't collect or they turn to the federal or state coffers to pay for the uninsured who don't have any money. In either case, guess who pays for all that healthcare for the uninsured? The insured and the taxpayers. Except the system of charging and collections is choking on it's own opaqueness and inefficiency. Premiums continue to climb and less people can afford insurance. Meanwhile medical care is denied to people who remain in denial about their health because they can't afford to see a doctor. Chronic conditions become acute and unnecessary healthcare dollars are spent on the increased severity. Oh, and lots of people die unnecessarily. But they're victims of their own poor choices in life, right?

    Yeah, anyone can play this game but most don't play very well. I'd say your play didn't hold a candle to Kimmel.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    Shorter WinstonV: "Cheap emotionalism is more satisfying to indulge than any examination of root causes, so let's have more of that."

  • Tony||

    Well we wouldn't want to succumb to cheap emotionalism unlike Republicans with their sober, meticulous approach to healthcare policy these past 8 years.

  • Harvard||

    Have you ever wondered, in a long responsive thread, when Michael Hihn has exhausted his pointlessness, Tony shows up, to intone in like fashion? They are both and the same. You've been outed my little queer, again.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Dumbfuck Harvard can't read timestamps Doesn't even know who posted first.
    Typical cyber-bully

  • Stormy Dragon||

    Our current laws generally that no one can be turned away if they need healthcare so providers have to provide.

    This is one of those things that people say a lot despite clearly not being true. If you show up in an emergency room, having a medical crisis, yes, they have to stabilize you. But they don't have to treat the underlying condition that caused the crisis.

    If you have a coronary and don't have coverage, they'll resuscitate you and send you home with a prescription for blood thinners so that you die slower. They're not required to give you a free bypass operation.

  • Overt||

    Most people can live a productive life with blood thinners.

    This is half the problem. People have heart problems, and they immediately get the most effective (and expensive) treatment available to them. My dad could have gone on nitro pills, but he got an angeoplasty instead because he insurance was willing to pay for it. Because price is really never considered by the individual, there is no incentive for the market to find cheaper alternatives.

    In a world where most people chose nitro pills because they were price sensitive, pharma and other medical companies would be figuring out cheaper ways to deliver something more effective at cheaper prices. We know this because we see exactly these innovations happening in the world of elective medical procedures, such as cosmetic surgery and vision correction. Practitioners in those fields simply have to figure out how to offer a compelling treatment in the $2000 - $8000 price range, because that is all people are willing and able to pay.

  • BYODB||

    And, unsurprisingly, no one will ever get a free bypass operation unless a surgeon decides to do so. Surgeon's aren't going to work for peanuts, and there aren't enough of them to give away free operations to everyone who needs one.

    Meet scarcity, the thing that people like you pretend doesn't exist.

  • Paloma||

    If someone shows up at the ER with a heart attack with a valve blockage, yes, a surgeon will do an angioplasty. This happened to a friend of mine. He was even semi awake and watched as they pulled a clot out of his coronary artery. I don't know if they even do bypass operations anymore. A bypass surgery would be upwards of $100,000 easily.

  • ThomasD||

    CABG is way more rare than it was even just twenty years ago.

    This is largely thanks to improvements in thrombolytic agents, angioplasty, and yes blood thinners like low molecular weight heparins, and anti factor X agents. Stay lengths for MI - regardless of payer - are down across the board.

    Not that Stormy knows fuck all about an of this.

  • Paloma||

    And they'll send you a bill for $10,000.

  • Sevo||

    "If you have a coronary and don't have coverage, they'll resuscitate you and send you home with a prescription for blood thinners so that you die slower."

    What a piece of whiny shit!
    If you *have* coverage, you might well get the same. Guess, what, you idiot, EVERYBODY dies and nothing the government does has any effect on that.
    Reality is a bitch to lefty dimbulbs.

  • Sevo||

    More:
    "If you have a coronary and don't have coverage, they'll resuscitate you and send you home with a prescription for blood thinners so that you die slower. They're not required to give you a free bypass operation."

    The above bit of whine is worth reading again.
    SD, an obvious econ ignoramus, is whining that those who have not bought insurance are treated differently than those who have.
    Hey, SD! Guess what? Those who bought better service get better service! Is this a surprise to you? How fucking stupid are you?

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    It looks like you're saying that even though Obamacare made the system of delivering healthcare worse, by contributing to increased costs and removing none of the very things that make those costs go up, we should still hold on to it.

    Keep in mind that Kimmel's treading into territory that he's only just learned about because of his son's condition--as a result, he's figured out that he can get cheap pops on his TV show by demanding that everyone get top-of-the-line healthcare without any indication of how to pay for it except taxing people in his income bracket (hey, maybe there's a place for that 98 percent "entertainment industry surtax" after all!). There's no discussion of what has specifically caused increases in the cost of healthcare in this country--namely, the lack of price transparency by medical providers, who treat public and private insurance plans like a free money pool; the cartel-like behavior of the FDA on limiting medications; and a severe restriction in the supply of doctors and medical facilities in a country that's staring down the barrel of a population gun in the form of aging baby boomers.

    It's easy for sheltered knobs like Kimmel to appeal to people's emotions, but when he doesn't back it up with an understanding of the underlying causes, anyone who takes his arguments seriously ought to be mocked for the rubes that they are.

  • Paloma||

    ^^^ This

  • Michael Hihn||

    He's figured out that he can get cheap pops on his TV show by demanding that everyone get top-of-the-line healthcare without any indication of how to pay for it

    RedRock every the bullshiiter, Kimmell DEFENDED what he was TOLD, by Cassidy .. as known by all literate Americans.

    Cassidy fucking lied
    So you're rightwing babbling merely excuses Cassidy being a liar. But, hey, he's a liar for YOUR team!

    STILL true: Left-Right=ZERO

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Cancer-addled Captain Hihn-sano stalking everyone up and down the page with his infantile emoting(cartwheels away chortling).

  • Michael Hihn||

    Red Rocks -- called out as a dumbfuck -- now DENIES that Kimmell DEFENDED what he was told by Cassidy!

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Captain Hihn-sano--called out as a cancer-addled shithead--now PRETENDS his delusions hold credence!

  • Eric Bana||

    Are we at the libertarian moment yet?

    (Sorry to be such a downer.)

  • ThomasD||

    Ask the guy in Nevada who's waiting in line to buy his heavily taxed and government regulated toilet paper marijuana.

  • J Mann||

    I'd pay money to hear Kimmel and Carolla debate health care.

    I don't think either one of them knows very much about policy, but they're close enough friends that you could hear a human conversation instead of "Liar!" "Asshole!" and whatever else passes for healthcare debate.

  • Rebel Scum||

    he occasionally accuses Republicans of being would-be baby killers

    I'm sure the irony is lost on him and his audience.

    "Coverage for all? No. Fact, it will kick about 30 million Americans off insurance."

    I see we are still conflating health insurance and healthcare.

    it was all about cheap zero-sum emotionalism.

    It's really all they (illiberals and regressives) have.

    Kimmel doesn't believe Americans deserve the chance to reduce the cost of health care with market-based reforms on the state level, or in giving states any flexibility in catering their plans to their own citizens.

    Like most illiberals and regressives, Kimmel does not believe in individual freedom. He does not "think", he emotes.

  • damikesc||

    I still like hacks like Stetler of CNN claiming that Kimmel's comment about "pounding" Brian Kilmeade of FNC was a promise to do a fist bump.

    Yeah, I take their gnashing whining about violence against the media seriously.

    And Kimmel...like all of late night TV...is shit.

  • Alan Vanneman||

    "Yes, everyone agrees. As far as I know, there isn't a single politician in America who has ever supported allowing babies to die because they are born with birth defects, even if the parents can't pay. Not pre-Obamacare, and not post-Obamacare."

    Sorry, that's totally untrue. Every libertarian, and there are many, who insists that health insurance is not a right implicitly assents to the argument that if you can't afford it, you don't get it. This principle doesn't make exceptions for "really sad cases". If every baby born with a birth defect is entitled to health care, how about every mommy with cancer? I'm sure Kimmel's arguments are overstated, but as Peter Suderman, and virtually every health care organization has pointed out, the current Republican health care "legislation" is total crap.

  • Tony||

    "Charities will take care of them ALL, literally ALL, if we just got government out of the way."

    The fact that this is a completely unjustified assumption, not to say obviously impossible, doesn't matter--it frees libertarians from having to confront reality, which would just give them a headache.

  • Stormy Dragon||

    The Kent Snyder case is informative here. Long time campaign manager for Ron Paul died of pneumonia at age 49, leaving his family with $400,000 in medical debt. A medical fund was set up to help... it raised $14,000 dollars.

    Libertarian "charity" couldn't even raise enough to treat one person who they had personally known for decades. But we're supposed to believe that would scale up to cover healthcare for all poor people?

  • BYODB||


    Libertarian "charity" couldn't even raise enough to treat one person who they had personally known for decades. But we're supposed to believe that would scale up to cover healthcare for all poor people?

    You're starting from a flawed premise, in that you assume that charity will cover healthcare for all poor people. It won't. Nothing will.

    Amusingly, a nationalized healthcare system and/or the ACA won't cover healthcare for all poor people either. You expect perfection from individual action and decisions while forgetting that universal coverage doesn't equal universal care which is what most of the disingenuous talking heads are saying. I guess that's all you are, a talking head 'best of' track.

  • Michael Hihn||

    The Kent Snyder case is informative here

    It's WORSE than totally useless.
    Your first wacky assumption is that he WORST case is the average case.
    The second wacky assumption is that thousands pf Charity Hospitals, all across America, were financed ONLY by people donors who "personally know" the patients,
    And that doesn't even include all the hard data.

  • Sevo||

    "Libertarian "charity" couldn't even raise enough to treat one person who they had personally known for decades. But we're supposed to believe that would scale up to cover healthcare for all poor people?"

    Libertarian "charity" hasn't solved world hunger, either, but WIH is that supposed to mean?
    Besides which, I certainly hope he had insurance, as most all of us who take responsibility for our lives do.
    BTW, your whine is distinctly lower shelf; $3.00/bottle.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Sevo ridicules the free market (private charity) ... on a libertarian website

    Libertarian "charity" hasn't solved world hunger, either

    (sneer) It did in America -- just as it provided universal medical care to the uninsured, regardless of income.

    According Bill Gates -- who does more than make an ass of himself on things he knows nothing about -- world hunger will be gone in less than 25 years.

    Oh yeah, "charity" is not just by libertarians.

  • Sevo||

    Note this as an example of Hihn's pathetic reading abilities.

  • Michael Hihn||

    (snort)

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    (snort)

    That about sums up the intellectual heft of your arguments, Hihn-tard.

  • Michael Hihn||

    "Charities will take care of them ALL, literally ALL, if we just got government out of the way."

    The fact that this is a completely unjustified assumption, not to say obviously impossible, doesn't atter

    It was the norm before Medicaid -- now Medicaid eligibles have a HIGHER rate of uninsured than the private market.

    Do the math Sparky This is BEFORE the Obamacare expansion.
    12 million Americans, 1/4 our uninsured were eligible for Medicaid or CHIP (children) but NEVER enrolled. Too few doctors can afford to treat them for as little as $17 per visit,
    Educate yourself.

    So ... when 22% of our (pre-Medicare) population comprises 25% of the uninsured ...who has the worst uninsured rate?

  • Hateful Reactionary||

    You give the appearance of having not read any of the numerous things to which you allude. Please read more before speaking for "every libertarian ... who insists that health insurance is not a right" yes that's many of us and yes many of us still have advocated for systems that provide care to the disadvantaged.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Like the private charity that provided uni9verdal treatment to the uninsured, regardess of income.

  • Sevo||

    Hihn is an ignorant old piece of shit who seems to get drunk early and hits the shift an bold keys as he spouts his bullshit.
    He is best ignored; he's pathetic.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Sevo
    Hihn is an ignorant old piece of shit

    Because I keep calling you out as a trashmouth, dumbfuck bully?
    http://reason.com/archives/201.....nt_6973641
    (sneer)

  • Sevo||

    And ignorant old piece of shit who is mystified by the concept of links.
    BTW, did you ever turn over those screen-shots to the Koch brothers? Did they laugh in your face?
    Do you need a safe-space?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Click the link that pisses him off. (lol)

  • Michael Hihn||

    BTW, did you ever turn over those screen-shots to the Koch brothers?

    (snort) I invent bat-shit crazy things so SEVO HIMSELF can prove how big a gullible fool he is! I can then just wait for the sucker to take the bait ... and then laugh even harder.
    Cuz it's FUN to ridicule bullies!!!

    Here, he's attacking me for DARING to say that Medicaid should be repealed ENTIRELY, with money transitioned back to the private charities that provided universal treatment to the uninsured, regardless of income. It's called Will of the People and Free Market Outcomes ... both PISSED ON by Sevo and his fellow statists. Pathetic?,

  • Ex-Mrs. Michael Hihn||

    He's not that old, but a lot fatter than the fake pic on his fake website.

  • Paloma||

    But if you look at England's National Healthcare System there was a case where not only were they allowing the young patient to die but forbid the parents from taking him to the US for treatment that may have saved him.

  • Sevo||

    "Every libertarian, and there are many, who insists that health insurance is not a right implicitly assents to the argument that if you can't afford it, you don't get it."

    Rely on the imbecile Vanneman to get outraged at a statement of fact.
    Yes, dim-bulb, medical insurance is a good; you might not be able to afford it. And it has been made far more expensive than it should be by government meddling, starting with Truman keeping wages fixed after WWII. And here you want more of that.
    So, please, take your ignorant whining about free shit and stuff it where the sun doesn't shine.

  • Michael Hihn||

    How many times can Sevo shame libertarianism by denying private charity?

    So, please, take your ignorant whining about free shit and stuff it where the sun doesn't shine.

    He's talking private charity, which you also rejected here.
    http://reason.com/archives/201.....nt_6973641

    It's assholes like you who disgrace libertarianism.

  • Sevo||

    You pathetic piece of shit, read this:

    Alan Vanneman|9.22.17 @ 11:11AM|#
    "...Every libertarian, and there are many, who insists that health insurance is not a right implicitly assents to the argument that if you can't afford it, you don't get it. "

    See anything about charity there, asshole?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Everyone already knows that Sevo is a dumbfuck ,,, but ...

    See anything about charity there, asshole?

    See anything it being "free shit" from government? (sneer)

  • Michael Hihn||

    Anyone else as fucking stupid as Sevo?

    For the mentally handicapped: when libertarians speak of helping the disadvantaged, we ALWAYS mean private charity. I mean, how crazy can one aggressor/bully be?

    Sevo has now attacked private charity FOUR times on this page. Like his asshole heroes in the GOP. You need HIS PERMISSION to spend your own money.

    Try and stop me, thug, and I'll blow your head off.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Try and stop me, thug, and I'll blow your head off.

    Super-Soakers don't count, dumbfuck Hihn-continent.

  • Michael Hihn||

    For the mentally handicapped: when libertarians speak of helping the disadvantaged, we ALWAYS mean private charity. I mean, how crazy can one aggressor/bully be?

  • Hateful Reactionary||

    What meds are you on man? Get a better psychiatrist. Up the downers, and tone down the uppers. You clearly are about 30 years older than everyone else here and don't realize you are embarrassing yourself and your ideas every single day.

  • Michael Hihn||

    You are indeed Hateful. For the mentally handicapped: when libertarians speak of helping the disadvantaged, we ALWAYS mean private charity. I mean, how crazy can one aggressor/bully be?

  • Sevo||

    "See anything it being "free shit" from government? (sneer)"

    Uh, yeah, Mike, you pathetic piece of shit:
    "...Every libertarian, and there are many, who insists that health insurance is not a right implicitly assents to the argument that if you can't afford it, you don't get it. "

    I realize that reading is one of those skills which seem to have 'diminished' in your case, but look at that statement.
    Notice that the idjit Vanneman is claiming 'health insurance' is a 'right'.
    Do you see that Mike? Is that hard to read, you fucking ignoramus?

  • Michael Hihn||

    Anyone else as fucking stupid as Sevo?

    For the mentally handicapped: when libertarians speak of helping the disadvantaged, we ALWAYS mean private charity. I mean, how crazy can one aggressor/bully be?

    Sevo has now attacked private charity FOUR FIVE times on this page. Like his asshole heroes in the GOP. You need HIS PERMISSION to spend your own money.

  • Sevo||

    Michael Hihn|9.24.17 @ 4:52AM|#
    "...Sevo has now attacked private charity FOUR FIVE times on this page..."

    Pathetic.

  • damikesc||

    Out of curiosity, didn't Obama promise BILLIONS in savings from stopping Medicare fraud?

    Whatever happened to that?

  • lalger2020||

    I don't think he promised it. I think he claimed that it had happened. (Or perhaps he promised it and then claimed it happened.)

    More specifically, the claim was that increased funding for the Senior Medicare Patrol had allowed HHS to recover $4.1 billion in 2011 vs. $2.14 billion in 2008. I don't know if the numbers are accurate or if there are other factors that explain this difference, but we should at least get the claim right.

    (More here: https://obamawhitehouse. DELETE SPACE archives.gov/blog/2012/02/14/obama DELETE SPACE -administration-s- DELETE SPACE unprecedented-fraud-fighting-pays )

  • Sevo||

    "...I don't know if the numbers are accurate or if there are other factors that explain this difference, but we should at least get the claim right...."

    Did you show up here since you noticed we are lacking in pedants?

  • Sevo||

    "Whatever happened to that?"

    Same thing that happened to the doctor you liked; he was lying through his teeth and knew it.

  • Rich10011||

    Should have given out Kimmel's number in the article!

  • Fuck You - Cut Spending||

    The real disheartening news is that Jimmy Kimmel was able to reproduce with the help of government.

  • lalger2020||

    "Not a single person would be 'kicked off' his or her insurance."

    Great point. People who have insurance today but would not have it under Graham-Cassidy wouldn't be "kicked off" of insurance. They'd merely have the freedom not to be able to afford it. This is a very important, highly meaningful distinction.

    Oh, wait. It isn't.

  • BYODB||

    So, Medicaid is 'insurance' now? I guess that's true, if you consider a provider taking a loss by seeing them and passing that price increase on to someone with 'actual' insurance a good thing.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    It's interesting that progs defend Obamacare by pointing out how people were able to get on Medicaid, but ignore the people in the economic tiers just above that line who are getting cornholed every month paying for plans that are more expensive and cover less than what they had before.

    Obamacare is mainly a wealth-distribution scheme by cosmopolitan elites to their underclass base of support by leeching off money from the middle-class to pay for medical welfare.

  • Michael Hihn||

    People who have insurance today but would not have it under Graham-Cassidy wouldn't be "kicked off" of insurance.

    Says the brainwashed goobers

  • Sevo||

    "Great point. People who have insurance today but would not have it under Graham-Cassidy wouldn't be "kicked off" of insurance. They'd merely have the freedom not to be able to afford it. This is a very important, highly meaningful distinction."

    Sorta like under O-care, right?

  • Hateful Reactionary||

    People listening to jimmy kimmel is the problem with health care policy. They get to vote to rob you to pay for Jimmy Kimmel's son's healthcare. Oh wait, he paid for his superior care himself? So what does this have to do with the national debate? FUCKING NOTHING.

    No one should get a vote, because they just use to rob you and rape you in the ass. Your opinion DOES NOT MERIT RESPECT because you probably fucking listen to Jimmy Fucking Kimmel about insurance policy.

    Fuck you all, and fuck democracy. I want a king who doesn't listen to these fucking robber proles.

  • abwrites||

    I don't think you were responding to me, but to clarify, I have been self-employed and paying my own insurance since 2005. I initially paid COBRA costs then learned that I could get cheaper insurance (didn't cover everything, but it was so much cheaper I changed) through a catastrophic plan. I have ALWAYS had health insurance. I need insurance, IMO, because I have 5 kids and God forbid if something happens to them, I need to protect them. If it was just me, I would just put the $2100 aside for a rainy day and just say screw it. Well, except for the penalty tax which is crazy.

  • Butler T. Reynolds||

    It's weird that the people who actually like Obamacare are not enrolled in it. If you want to see someone pop a vein in his head, talk to a person who has had to enroll.

  • Kroneborge||

    "Yes, everyone agrees. As far as I know, there isn't a single politician in America who has ever supported allowing babies to die because they are born with birth defects, even if the parents can't pay. Not pre-Obamacare, and not post-Obamacare."

    Of course there are millions of liberals that think the baby should die because it's an inconvenience...

  • Kroneborge||

    "Yes, everyone agrees. As far as I know, there isn't a single politician in America who has ever supported allowing babies to die because they are born with birth defects, even if the parents can't pay. Not pre-Obamacare, and not post-Obamacare."

    Of course there are millions of liberals that think the baby should die because it's an inconvenience...

  • josh||

    24 minus 20 equals 4...so what about that 4 million?

    During his rant, Kimmel helpfully pointed out this wasn't his area of expertise, so it's comforting that millions will make their judgements based on his analysis.

    Lastly, preexisting conditions cost more, so acting outraged that they'd be asked to pay more makes you look clueless. It amounts to arguing with McDonald's for charging you more for those extra cheeseburgers simply because you're really hungry.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Hey, dumbass, he was CORRECT that Senator Cassidy lied to him.

    Pay attention. This is what Cassidy said,

    Cassidy came up with something he called the "Jimmy Kimmel Test," a test that no "family should be denied medical care, emergency or otherwise, because they can't afford it."

    Do you also deny cutting back on Medicaid -- in DEFIANCE of free market outcomes? Instead of transitioning the federal dollars back to private charity ... which provided universal coverage -- your big government GOP assholes want to spend it elsewhere

    You're also using numbers from the wrong bill.

  • Sevo||

    Fuck off, Mike; if you're not embarrassed, you should be, and your ex has your number.
    Fuck off, you ignorant piece of shit.

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    MOAR aggression, Sad,

    "Do you also deny cutting back on Medicaid -- in DEFIANCE of free market outcomes? Instead of transitioning the federal dollars back to private charity ... which provided universal coverage -- your big government GOP assholes want to spend it elsewhere."

    Fuck off, Mike; if you're not embarrassed, you should be, and your ex has your number.
    Fuck off, you ignorant piece of shit.

    NO ANSWER. MORE BULLYING.
    SEVO.

  • Uncle Jay||

    RE: Don't Fall for Jimmy Kimmel's Cheap Zero-Sum Emotionalism
    His political rants could be written by any liberal activist.

    I hate to bring the news to you David, but liberal activists are the ones who write Kimmel's comments.

  • Brother Kyfho||

    Kimmel needs to sit his as down, shut his fat mouth and listen to his friend Adam Corolla (something of a conservative, small business owner) explain to him why he is a fucking retard on the order of Chelsea Handler.

  • Michael Hihn||

    (snort) Kimmell is CORRECT that Cassidy lied to him. That makes YOU the retard. Just another bellowing blowhard.

  • Sanjuro Tsubaki||

    Late night is for losers. But then so is day time.

    And then there's prime time tv. Ugh.

  • Hattori Hanzo||

    Jimmy hasn't been funny since noineteen noinety noine.

  • Eman||

    Okay, A) it doesn't need to be true, its comedy, dammit. Lighten up. B) he gets this completely backwards. as a card carrying member of the media elite he had the money to take care of a marginal case that some actuary could have deemed an inefficient use of money, and C) it looks like "the man show" was Jimmy Kimmel at his funniest, which is... not great.

  • Alex Jones, Infowars.com||

    D) Senator Cassidy was a fucking liar, Why does that confuse you people?

  • Mark22||

    Yes, everyone agrees. As far as I know, there isn't a single politician in America who has ever supported allowing babies to die because they are born with birth defects, even if the parents can't pay. Not pre-Obamacare, and not post-Obamacare.

    Really? Without limits? Do you support spending $10 million to give a baby with serious birth defects two years of miserable life?

  • John Galt is back||

    1) Nobody said without limits
    2) $10 million is even crazier.
    3) Why do the elderly have more rights in your fascist paradise?

  • MarkLastname||

    How many socks do you have, Mike?

  • Michael Hihn||

    "How many socks do you have, Mike?"

    His name is John, but I LOVE how he called out your typically wacky bullshit!
    And why did you FAIL to answer his incon-veeeeeen- yent question? "Why do the elderly have more rights in your fascist paradise?"

  • Michael Ejercito||

    I fail to understand why Jimmy Kimmel's opinions on this is more newsworthy than that of Christopher c. Morton, William a. Levinson, or Joshua Black.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Seriously? You don't know who Kimmel is? He has tens of millions of viewers, versus your list of nobodies. And that's just for openers. You must not follow the news. It was Senator Cassidy who made it a big news story -- with a massive lie -- as noted in the story here.

    Cassidy tried to exploit, for personal political gain, the severe birth defect of Kimmel's newborn son -- who .had open heart surgery when he was only about a month old..Most parents would be pissed at some shitbag politician exploiting a death threat to their child ... with so shameful a lie. It may make more sense in the future, it you ever become a father.

    If you need more, you might learn who Kimmel is on Google or Bing,

  • Lester224||

    Who defines "adequate and affordable"? Nah, it just allows states to pass up on the pre-existing conditions bit. Who doesn't have a pre-existing condition? This is a gift to the insurance companies in any states where they have a good lobby.

    Nothing that doesn't address healthcare and drug prices via pro-competitive and anti-monopoly measures approaches solving health care accessibility.

  • Michael Hihn||

    Don't forget - if you even knew -- the mandate was demanded by health insurers, to offset the insane risks of insuring all per-existing conditions. They did that after Obama was elected, but before he took office, probably because Obama ran close to the middle on health care ... STRONGLY opposed the mandate to get the nomination .. and actually gave the best EVER political argument against a mandate. Ridiculed it. "We could end homelessness by mandating everyone buy a house."

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online