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.
Jun 9, 2026 5:24 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
American students: Raw material or individual persons?
Catherine Pakaluk The quality of K-12 education in America is a major concern. This is largely because, despite marginally high spending per student, the United States does pete very well against other countries on standardized tests. The economics of education particularly interested Catherine Pakaluk, who holds a doctorate in economics from Harvard and is an assistant professor of economics at Catholic University of America. Pakaluk gave a lecture, “Economics of Education,” on June 23 at Acton University. In this talk,...
The West was built on faith, family, and free markets: Trump
During a remarkable speech this morning in Warsaw, President Trump did something that many believed impossible: He spoke clearly – eloquently, even – as he passionately defined and defended transatlantic values. Unlike so many of those who parrot the phrase, he began by describing what those values are. Standing at the site of the Warsaw Uprising, he said that Western civilization is embodied in faith, family, economic vitality, limited government, national sovereignty, intellectual freedom, and the pursuit of excellence. Those...
Unemployment as economic-spiritual indicator — June 2017 report
Series Note: Jobs are one of the most important aspects of a morally functioning economy. They help us serve the needs of our neighbors and lead to human flourishing both for the individual and munities. Conversely, not having a job can adversely affect spiritual and psychological well-being of individuals and families. Because unemployment is a spiritual problem, Christians in America need to understand and be aware of the monthly data on employment. Each month highlight the latest numbers we need...
Chief Justice John Roberts tells kids they need to eat a little dirt
There’s an old proverb that says, “We must eat a peck of dirt before we die.” What this means is that just as no one can escape eating a certain amount of dirt on their food, everyone must endure a number of unpleasant things in his or her lifetime. A peck is about two gallons, which would be a lot of dirt if you had to eat it all at once. But over a lifetime the few grains of soil...
The ‘end’ of work
In the Q&A part of a session I led at last month’s Acton University on Abraham Kuyper and Leo XIII(based on this recent volume), I was asked about specific areas where the two figures have something concrete to contribute today. One theme I highlighted was to their shared emphasis on the centrality and dignity of human work. Today there is a great deal of anxiety over the future of work in an age of increasing globalization, automation, and structural changes...
Opening the American city: Toward a new urban agenda
In the mid-20th-century, American cities suffered a wave of violent crime and poverty, due in part to shifts in the economy and public policy, as well as mass suburbanization. Yet in recent decades, those same cities are experiencing somewhat of a renewal. Crime rates are falling. Prosperity is on the rise. And new opportunities for growth, diversity, and innovation abound. “We are at the dawn of the urban century,” writes Michael Hendrix in a new report from AEI’s Values &...
Can health care be left to the free market?
In one of the worst opinion pieces published in the New York Times in recent memory, Farzon A. Nahvi, an emergency medicine physician, argues the free market cannot provide health care because some patients arrive at the hospital unconscious: As an emergency medicine physician in a busy urban hospital, I have patients brought to me unconscious several times a day. Often, they are found down in the street by a good Samaritan who called 911 on their behalf. We are...
Dorothy Sayers, school choice, and long run student success
Today’s Wall Street Journal article on education choice, “New Evidence on School Vouchers,” might look oddly familiar for those of us who have read Dorothy Sayers’ The Lost Tools of Learning. The WSJ piece refers to two new studies that investigated student performance in states with voucher programs: Louisiana and Indiana. In Louisiana, a state with a program that allows for vouchers for private schools, 7,100 students attend private or religious schools. Meanwhile, over 34,000 students utilize Indiana’s statewide voucher...
Is it cleaner to trade pollution?
Note: This is post #40 in a weekly video series on basic microeconomics. In an effort to reduce pollution, the government tried two policy prescriptions under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, notes Alex Tabarrok of Marginal Revolution University. The mand and control—mandated that each power plant lower its pollution by a determined amount. However, different firms face different cost curves and, because information is dispersed, policymakers don’t always know those costs. The second policy prescription—tradable pollution permits—empowered firms...
Pulling out of Paris agreement is a ‘market distortion’: European leader
The G20 summit in Hamburg e to an end, and the dominant story remains America’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement. It’s been less reported that some European leaders have implied that the EU should take economic revenge on the U.S. because – in their words – limiting government intervention in the economy is a “market distortion.” Germany currently holds the presidency of the G20 summit, with Chancellor Angela Merkel overseeing the violence-plagued event. The final declaration notes the U.S....
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved