The discussion of the CBO estimate of a 500,000 job loss from raising the minimum wage to $10.10 /hr have all centered on how unlikely that estimate is. For purposes of discussion, that is a losing debate. I'd like to raise a different question.
What would be the decrease in federal outlays for SNAP and other programs from that increase. Clearly, as many have said on dKos, the low minimum is a subsidy to Walmart etc. Their employees can live to come to work each day because they get help from the government. So, how much less would the federal government pay out for these benefits if the minimum wage (for untipped workers -- one fight at a time) were $10.10, minus the extra that they'd have to pay out if 1/2 million of those actually lost their jobs?
Then, how many people would be put to work on infrastructure projects if this much money were spent on them?
Alternatively, what would it cost to do infrastructure projects which would employ 500,000 more people?
Then -- if the cost of infrastructure programs that would employ those people is less than the savings from increasing the minimum -- the Republicans opposing raising the minimum because of the job loss are hypocrites because they oppose decreasing the deficit by that amount of money, while they oppose putting more people to work because it would increase the deficit -- although it would increase the deficit less.