SPY -0.48%
BND -1.20%
QQQ -0.32%
DIA -0.75%
VNQ -1.26%
GLD -1.64%
BTC -1.89%
AAPL -1.12%
GOOGL -2.15%
NVDA -1.19%
MSFT -0.17%
META +5.62%
AMZN -1.68%
TSLA +0.57%
UBER -0.67%
GS -2.01%
BAC +0.12%
JPM -0.29%
BRK.A +0.47%
COST -0.57%
XOM +1.21%
BABA -4.86%
WMT -2.59%
SPCX -3.68%
DIS +1.42%
F -3.36%
  • Discounts and special offers
  • Subscriber-only articles and interviews
  • Breaking news and trending topics

Already a subscriber?

By signing up, you accept Moneywise's Terms of Use, Subscription Agreement, and Privacy Policy.

Not interested ?

Economy
Entrepreneur and Cost Plus Drug Company (MCCPDC) Co-Founder Mark Cuban speaks during a Senate Committee in 2025. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Mark Cuban says 'insane' healthcare costs will get more people 'fired or not hired' than AI — here's his big solution

Back on March 24, billionaire Mark Cuban was on X doing the math on what health coverage costs employers. It came out to about $30K a year for each employee’s family — “usually the 2nd largest expense after payroll,” he wrote. “Which is insane.”

He came back to it with another tweet on Sept. 22, and he’s blunter this time.

Advertisement

“I hope people realize that for the foreseeable future, the cost of healthcare benefits will get more people fired, or not hired, than AI,” wrote Cuban, who co-founded the online discount pharmacy Cost Plus Drugs.

The money news that actually matters.

By signing up, you accept Moneywise Terms of Use, Subscription Agreement, and Privacy Policy.

As for who’s to blame, Cuban pointed in March at giant, vertically integrated insurers swallowing most of that spending. He wants them broken up — and there’s already a bipartisan bill in the Senate that would take a swing at it.

What employers are actually paying for coverage

Employers and their workers paid an average of $26,993 for family coverage in 2025, up 6% or $1,408 from a year earlier, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s annual survey of more than 1,800 employers. The health policy nonprofit found workers themselves covered $6,850 of it, and some 154 million Americans under 65 get their coverage this way.

There was no relief in sight, either. When the survey came out on Oct. 22, 2025, insurers were already asking for double-digit rate increases on individual and small-group plans, and KFF warned the hikes could spill over to large employers next. “There is a quiet alarm bell going off,” KFF President and CEO Drew Altman said at the time, pointing at GLP-1 drugs, hospital prices and tariffs.

Must Read

Do healthcare costs really kill jobs?

A National Bureau of Economic Research working paper from researchers at the University of Chicago, Yale, the U.S. Treasury and other institutions backs Cuban up on this one. The team tracked what happened to companies after nearby hospital mergers pushed up the price of care, and found that every 1% rise in healthcare prices trimmed payrolls and headcount by 0.4% at employers outside the health sector — in effect, the researchers concluded, a payroll tax.

People earning between $20,000 and $100,000 a year absorbed most of those cuts, while six-figure earners barely felt them, the authors found. And companies mostly cut jobs outright, the paper says, since workers won’t take a pay cut to cover a benefit that didn’t get any better.

So why does AI get the blame?

To be fair, AI really is showing up in the layoff numbers. U.S. employers announced plans to cut more than 97,000 jobs in May — the most for that month since 2020 — and named AI as the main reason for 40% of them, according to outplacement firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. By the end of May, companies had announced 87,714 job cuts tied to AI, more than in all of 2025, Moneywise reported.

Still, the broader job market didn’t crack. U.S. payrolls grew by 172,000 that same month, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the unemployment rate held at 4.3%.

“It’s far easier to blame AI than it is to blame Healthcare costs,” Cuban wrote back in March.

Advertisement

What the Break Up Big Medicine Act would actually do

Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Josh Hawley, R-Mo. — from opposite ends of the Senate — introduced the Break Up Big Medicine Act on Feb. 10. It would make it illegal for one company to own a medical provider alongside an insurer, pharmacy benefit manager or drug and device wholesaler. Anyone who owns both today would get a year to sell one side off, with the Federal Trade Commission and the Justice Department’s antitrust division enforcing penalties on holdouts.

The whole point is to unwind vertical integration — the setup that lets one conglomerate pay for your care, set its price and deliver it. Just three pharmacy benefit managers process nearly 80% of the country’s prescription drug claims, according to the bill’s findings.

What it means for your job

If you get insurance through work, give your open enrollment packet a hard look this fall. KFF CEO Altman predicted employers would respond the way they usually do, with higher deductibles and more cost-sharing — on top of the $6,850 the average worker already chips in toward a family plan.

And if you earn between $20,000 and $100,000 a year, the NBER research puts you squarely in the range that lost jobs when healthcare prices climbed.

Cuban, for his part, already told his followers what to do about it: Call your senator and tell them to support the bill.

You May Also Like

Share this:

Godwin Oluponmile is a content specialist, SEO strategist and copywriter with seven years of expertise in finance, Web 3.0, B2B SaaS and technology. His work has been featured in publications such as Entrepreneur, HackerNoon, Blocktelegraph and Benzinga.

more from Godwin Oluponmile

Explore the latest

Disclaimer

The content provided on Moneywise is information to help users become financially literate. It is neither investment, tax nor legal advice, is not intended to be relied upon as a forecast, research or investment advice, and is not a recommendation, offer or solicitation to buy or sell any securities, enter into any loan, mortgage or insurance agreements or to adopt any investment strategy. Tax, investment and all other decisions should be made, as appropriate, only with guidance from a qualified professional. We make no representation or warranty of any kind, either express or implied, with respect to the data provided, the timeliness thereof, the results to be obtained by the use thereof or any other matter. Advertisers are not responsible for the content of this site, including any editorials or reviews that may appear on this site. For complete and current information on any advertiser product, please visit their website.

†Terms and Conditions apply.