Given the chart I just saw in the NYT (link is on their home page, next to todayās story about the ruling), this law overwhelmingly benefits very poor people, in that the huge proportional shift from Uninsured to Insured will occur in the Medicaid segment. Medicaid coverage, as I read it (open to correction!) will be 133% of the federal poverty level. That breaks down (2012 figures) as follows:
Family Size 1 Individual = $14,856
2 individuals = 20,123
3 individuals = 25,390
4 ā¦ = 30,657
5 ā¦ = 35,923
6 ā¦ = 41,190
Raise your hand if you think this represents āthe middle class.ā In my region, these income levels equate to homelessness.
The rest of the NYT chart showed > numbers of middle class now being covered. Itās a token amount, particularly compared to the benefit for the above group. In the middle is the benefit to Exchanges. Indirectly, that could affect premiums in that it would introduce competition, albeit from govāt sources (States). So that could have an eventual favorable benefit to the middle class who buys traditional insurance, but I question how immediate & how far-reaching that will be.
Correct if if Iām wrong: I thought that one of the central points of this ACA measure was to provide more affordable coverage options for the full-time working middle class, large numbers of which forego coverage currently because they cannot afford the $400+ premiums for individuals ā never mind astronomical premiums for whole families. It was not my impression that very few middle class working families are currently not insured, whereas the bulk of the uninsured is overwhelmingly those in the statistical poverty level.
