It is no surprise at all the USSC upheld the Obamacare subsidies. After all, the court would have struck them down previously if they had thought the subsidies didn't pass constitutional muster.
Of course I am not a fan of this law because I feel that for all intents and purposes it is healthcare rationing. Unless you can afford a platinum plan or you already have health insurance on your job, you are totally screwed. The premiums or the annual deductibles make the "insurance" unaffordable to use
The real aim, of course, is the neoliberal idea that companies should not even have to provide any benefits to employees at all. Force everybody to pay for the insurance themselves.
Homeownership became unaffordable going clear back to the mid-1970s, when there was a shift in household makeup where instead of a single wage earner, there were two working adults. That is when real estate outfits started getting greedy and started jacking up the prices to the point few singles can afford to own a home anymore, or at least a stick house on a plot of land. The only way they can even break into the market is owning a mobile home where they pay space rent or they buy a condo, which has little land attached and where there are a ton of restrictions. The real estate outfits jacked up the prices assuming there would be two wage earners in the household.
However, thanks to stifling wages, even married couples are being forced out of the real estate market. That is in line with the neoliberal goal that everybody but the very richest will be renters and never own a goddamned thing. That is one of the aims behind peddling "tiny houses," which are nothing more than glorified shanties for the peons. The rich can buy up all of the land that the middle class and even the poor would have otherwise owned and then rent it out. Those who can't afford the rent can just go begging on the streets.