Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
No, John Oliver Did Not Give Away $15 Million. You Did.
No, John Oliver Did Not Give Away $15 Million. You Did.
Apr 20, 2026 12:03 PM

Have you ever watched HBO’s Last Week Tonight? It’s a show where edian John Oliver reads a teleprompter explaining to Americans what is wrong with our country. It’s also a show where smug, self-satisfied progressives who miss John Stewart can be entertained while thinking they are watching “smart” content.

In reality, Last Week Tonight is frequently one of the dumbest shows on cable (in the sense that watching it makes you less informed about the world). And yet it is almost inescapable if you have an internet connection. Even if you don’t subscribe to HBO you’ll find clips every Monday morning on left-leaning media sites, or someone who wants to feel self-righteous and pseudo-intelligent will slip it into your social media channels.

A prime example is the most recent episode where Oliver takes on the debt collection industry. A representative headline reporting on the show (from a site that should know better) is “Watch: John Oliver just topped Oprah with one of the largest giveaways ever on TV.”

Oliver didn’t top Oprah nor was he involved in one of the largest giveaways ever on TV. The actual amount of money that Oliver gave away wasn’t that significant — $60,000 — but he was able to fool people who don’t know much about economics into thinking he actually gave away $15 million.

I’m not kidding. There are a lot of people this morning who really think a third-tier cable talk show host gave away $15,000,000.

You can watch the clip here. But I warn you it’s crude, simplistic, misleading, overly long, and filled with Oliver’s attempts at what he considers to be “humor.”

We could spend all day parsing the economic fallacies and Nanny State assumptions in the video. Essentially, Oliver thinks that one of the most regulated industries in America simply suffers from a lack of regulation. He also thinks we should pay our debts “when we can” but if we can’t, well, that’s why rich people exist: so that we can redistribute money from the haves to the have-nots.

But let’s set aside plaints and focus on the absurd claim that Oliver “gave away” $15 million.

Here’s how it works: Oliver starts a debt collection business (and is shocked and horrified to find that it’s relatively easy to start a business in America). His pany then buys nearly $15 million dollars of medical debt for less than half a penny on the dollar ($60,000). He then donates the debt to a non-profit that “forgives” medical debt (i.e., refuses to seek collections). Then Oliver claims he “gave away $15 million.”

Not quite.

Oliver says he bought “out of statute” medical debt from Texas. According to Texas law, debt collectors cannot sue individuals in an attempt to collect debts that are more than four years past due. So the debt is essentially uncollectible anyway. Yet Oliver falsely claims that is “medical debt they no longer have to pay.” That is not true — the legal obligation to pay the debt remains even if the statue of limitations has expired.

So how much did Oliver actually give away? Probably less than $60,000.

What Oliver bought was a very strict and limited right to attempt collections on a large amount of debt. Essentially, Oliver bought the right to ask people “Will you pay me what is owed?” and if they say “No, I don’t think I will” he has absolutely no legal recourse. None.

That is why the debt Oliver bought is not worth $15 million — because attempts to collect the debt when people still had a legal obligation to do soalready failed. So how much is the bad debt worth? It’s worth what Oliver could collect.

If Oliver was able to get the 9,000 people on the bad debt list to send a check for $6.67 he might be able to recoup his $60,000 investment. But panies that sold the debt doubted they’d even recoup that trivial amount, which is why they sold the debt at the price they did.

Oliver therefore didn’t give away $15 million; he gave away the right to collect about $60,000 in uncollectible debt. If you think this is semantics ask HBO’s accountants if they’ll be writing off this “$15 million debt” on pany’s tax returns next year.

So what does it matter if Oliver pulls this silly, dishonest stunt? Because it allows him and his viewers to feel better about themselves (“Oliver is so generous, and I’m a good person for supporting him!”) when the reality is that thousands of hospitals and medical businesses are the ones that were hurt when they came up $15 million short of what was owed them.

In 2014, U.S. hospitals provided $42.8 billion in pensated care, representing 5.3 percent of annual hospital expenses. You know who paid for that pensated care? You did. You paid more in higher insurance premiums, higher deductibles, higher taxes, and higher cost of medical care pensate for those who couldn’t — and those who merely wouldn’t — pay what they owed.

The salaries for the nurses and hospital janitors didn’t go away just because John Oliver bought some bad debt. The cost of the electricity to run the heart monitoring machines didn’t disappear either. The $15 million represented actual expenses that have already been paid. That means all of the $15 million of bad debt Oliver bought was already absorbed by the hospitals and passed on to you and other health care consumers.

So when you see a smug Brit on TV tell you he gave away $15 million you can correct his ignorance by responding, “No, you didn’t. We did.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
What Liberal Evangelicals Should Know About the Economic Views of Conservative Evangelicals
We read the same Bible and follow the same Jesus. We go to the same churches and even agree on the same social issues. So why then do liberal and conservative evangelicals tend to disagree so often about economic issues? The answer most frequently given is that both sides simply baptize whatever political and economic views they already believe. While this is likely to be partially true, I don’t think it is a sufficient explanation for the views of more...
Video & Audio: Why Libertarians Need God
The 2014Acton Lecture Seriesgot underway last week with an address from Jay Richards on the topic of “Why Libertarians Need God.” In his address, Richards argued that core libertarian principles of individual rights, freedom and responsibility, reason, moral truth, and limited government make little sense in an atheistic and materialist context, but make far more sense when grounded in a theistic belief system. The video of the full lecture is available below; I’ve embedded the audio after the jump. ...
Business and the Option for the Poor
There is no reason to assume that the preferential option for the poor is somehow a preferential option for big government, says Acton research director Samuel Gregg. Gregg writes that lifting people out of poverty — and not just material poverty but also moral and spiritual poverty — does not necessarily mean that the most effective action is to implement yet another welfare program: What does living out the option for the poor mean in practice? We must engage in...
Hobby Lobby Owners Speak Out on HHS Mandate
In a new video from the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the Green Family, owners of the embattled retail chain, Hobby Lobby, discusses the religious foundation of their business and the threat the federal government now poses to those who share their beliefs. “What’s at stake here is whether you’re able to keep your religious freedom when you open a family business,” says Lori Windham, Senior Council at The Becket Fund, “whether you can continue to live out your faith...
Audio: Samuel Gregg Discusses ‘Tea Party Catholic’
Acton Institute Director of Research Samuel Gregg joined host Mike Murray on his show “Faith, Culture and Politics” on the Guadalupe Radio Network to discuss his latest book, Tea Party Catholic. The interview lasted nearly a half an hour, and you can listen to it via the audio player below. ...
Donald Miller’s Lopsided Theology of Work
When es to theology of work, the church has enjoyed a healthy season of self-critique and introspection. Sermons, books, and seminars abound. Dead theologians and forgotten works are routinely remembered and resurrected, challenging a host of our modern assumptions about wealth, exchange, and the nature of work itself. We have, as monly hears it, begun the process of tearing down the “divides” between Sunday-morning spirituality and grindstone temporality. In line with such a development, bestselling author Donald Miller recently shared...
A Wesleyan Approach to Faith, Work, and Economic Transformation
“[Wealth] is an excellent gift of God, answering the noblest ends. In the hands of his children, it is food for the hungry, drink for the thirsty, raiment for the naked: It gives to the traveller and the stranger where to lay his head. By it we may supply the place of an husband to the widow, and of a father to the fatherless. We may be a defence for the oppressed, a means of health to the sick, of...
From Aid to Enterprise
Can the current model of humanitarian aid generated by networks of large philanthropic foundations, NGOs, and Western governments actually alleviate global poverty? The latest Liberty Law Talk podcast asks Acton’s Michael Miller, director of the new Poverty Cure Initiative, to address that question and to explain what conditions can lead to prosperity: As Miller discusses, the prevalent humanitarian aid model frequently uproots the very beginnings of the circles of exchange that must exist for wealth to be created in these...
What Does Religious Liberty Stand Upon?
With everything from the HHS mandate to Duck Dynasty to Sister Wives, there is much in the news regarding religious liberty. What are we to make of it? Is religious liberty simply being tolerant of others’ religious choices? Michael Therrien, at First Things, wants to clear up the discussion, from the Catholic point of view. He starts by looking at an article quoting Camille Paglia, atheist, lesbian and university professor. In it, Paglia rushes to the defense of Phil Robertson,...
Stewardship and Thanksgiving
Today at Ethika Politika, I reflect on what it might look like to adopt thanksgiving as one’s orientation toward human experience and society: We may think of gratitude … as an appreciation of the joy that es from what is virtuous and the recognition of “what God has done or is doing.” Now we have a hermeneutic for our experience, grounded in the God-given “‘eucharistic’ function of man,” to borrow from Fr. Alexander Schmemann. It is not enough to simply...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved