But doesn't it help the state overall, because more people will become ineligible for tax breaks and other diverse subsidies and programs the state offer's for the low-income households. Has any study taken a look at that?

I had the same thought:

35hr x $7 = 245, x4 weeks = $980

35hr x $15 = 525, x4 weeks = $2100

At my poorest (and with 3 dependents) EBT only ever paid out $~650 a month. The gross delta here is $1120. So the state should come out ahead.

But all I've heard of is hours being cut in line with wage increases. So few workers are pulling that $2100 and are presumably still on benefits.

Surely there is some level at which it will reduce unemployment. So really it’s just an argument as to what the right level is.