Seem like the numbers I come up with are alot different than yours. Also according to all of the working models(all the states that recently raised the Minimum Wage), raising the minimum wage boosts the economy!!
I've done a pretty though search of these working models and here's what I came up with.
The first one I studied was Vermont:
VLWC Facts and Figures
How do people not earning a livable wage get by?
Many people don't make up the difference and do without basic necessities. (For example, over 60,000 Vermonters have no health care.) Others rely on public assistance programs like food stamps, the Low Income Heat Assistance Program, Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF), and Medicaid. Some of us live in substandard housing, or pay a large percentage of our income for housing. People receive help from family members, work two jobs, barter, or work under the table. More and more people depend on credit, which then means that meeting payments becomes more and more difficult. The total effect of this picture is that many Vermonters lack basic economic security, depend on state and federal public assistance programs and face a declining standard of living.
We maybe able to eventually rid the system of the super high overhead of the nation's welfare costs. At the very least we could get it down to a low number!

Isn't it mostly just young people starting out who aren't earning livable wages?
This is a favorite argument of businesses- the only people earning the minimum wages or low wage in general are teenagers living with their parents. But it just isn't true. According to the phase 8 of the Vermont Job Gap study, Sixty-one percent (61%) of all year round full time workers in Vermont who earned less than $15,000 ($7.20/hr) in 1999 were over 29 years old. Over 10,000 full time workers over 29 earned less than $15,000 per year.

What is the minimum wage in Vermont?
Currently the minimum wage in Vermont is $7.25 an hour ($15,080 /yr. (2006)). It will increase again on Jan. 1, 2007 and every Jan 1st thereafter based on a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) using the national CPI-U (Consumer Price Index-Urban) figure. Nationally, it is $5.15 an hour ($10,712 /yr.). The minimum wage is important even to those earning considerably above it. Because the minimum wage sets a limit on how low wages can go for most people, it also sets the starting point for where wages move up from. Since the minimum wage is so low, it helps keep wages in general lower -even for those of us earning in the $8 to $9 an hour range. If the wage had just kept pace with inflation since 1969 when it was a $1.60 an hour, minimum wage would be $8.00 an hour in 2005. However, because it has not, the extremely low minimum wage is helping to pull wages down for everyone.

A cost of living adjustment (COLA) is a tool used to increase wages based on inflation. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is used to adjust dollar values for inflation. There are several ways to calculate a COLA for the minimum wage rate. Some states, such as Washington, base their COLA for the minimum wage rate on changes in the Consumer Price Index for Union Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W). In other cases, such as the Federal Poverty Measure, an alternative CPI is used to calculate annual increases. There are currently minimum wage COLA's in Vermont, Oregon, Washington, and Florida.

The same businesses that now hire low-wage workers will still need those jobs done, and the same pool of workers will still apply for those jobs-except now they will be working for livable wages.
Oregon's experience in raising the minimum wage shows this. Between 1997 and 1999 Oregon raised its minimum wage from $4.75 an hour to $6.50 an hour. A recent study by the Oregon Center for Public Policy found that "Oregon's 'highest in the nation' minimum wage continues to raise wages for former welfare recipients and other low-wage workers without harming their employment opportunities. The increase has reversed years of declining wages for welfare recipients and other low-wage workers."

VLWC Facts and Figures

After-tax corporate profits more than doubled since 2000. Yet, for most workers (the bottom 80 percent), inflation-adjusted wages have declined. Commerce Department figures show the decline was so steep that, in the first quarter of 2006 wages and salaries collectively accounted for only 45 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic Product -- an all-time low, and down from 50 percent as recently as 2001.

Still, there are naysayers. These critics primarily raise two objections to minimum-wage laws. First, they claim such legislation unduly increases business costs, hurting profitability. Well, of course, but child labor laws are expensive and demonstrably contrary to unregulated labor practices. Sweatshop prohibitions are costly, too, and imagine the profit gain if we gutted workplace safety and environmental protection laws. Bottom line, we've historically passed legislation establishing minimal standards of economic justice, and business still manages to produce record profits.

''A rising tide lifts all boats.''
All that economic growth had to go somewhere. If the overwhelming majority of Americans were left out, who gained? Really rich people, that's who. According to a Wall Street Journal analysis of U.S. Census data, the share of income growth going to America's wealthiest families set a new high in 2005. Instead of all boats, today a rising tide apparently lifts only yachts. Anyone below the yacht-income class better be good at bailing water.
I love this one because at the nice marina's in New England, you don't see alot of small boats.
What's happening with wages in our current economy fails the test of common humanity that is fundamental to capitalist economics. If it's inappropriate to bump the minimum wage when corporate profits are peaking and wages plummeting, maybe we should throw in the towel on having a just economy altogether, and go back to the halcyon days of sweatshops and child labor.
I'm always a bitching about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer and it's true. The big Corperations are making record profit and can afford to pay more to the low people on the totem pole.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Heres one about Oregon:

Oregon Minimum Wage Increases Boost Welfare-to-Work Efforts - Report -5/29/98
Debates over raising the minimum wage often focus on the issue of who will benefit from lifting the wage floor. Some claim that increasing the minimum wage does little for low-income families, because minimum wage earners frequently are teenagers or secondary workers in middle-class families. While the benefits of minimum wage increases are not targeted solely on low-income families, many of the workers whose earnings rise as a result of such increases are in low-income families. In addition, the large majority of minimum wage workers are adults, and many are the primary breadwinner in their family.

New evidence from Oregon suggests that minimum wage increases can have a significant effect on parents who leave welfare for work. As a result of a successful state ballot initiative, the Oregon minimum wage rose from $4.75 an hour to $5.50 an hour in January 1997 and then to $6.00 an hour in January 1998.(1) Data from Oregon's welfare agency show that the earnings of parents who moved from welfare to work were boosted as a result of these increases.

The minimum wage increase appears to have affected a substantial proportion of Oregon's welfare recipients who found work in 1997. In the last quarter of 1997, for example, nearly one-third of the welfare recipients who found work — including half of those who found part-time work — earned the state's new minimum wage of $5.50 an hour. This substantial clustering of wages at the new minimum wage level strongly suggests that many of these workers would have earned less than $5.50 without the increase in the state's wage floor.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Here's one for the studies in Pennsylvania:

-Small Business Job Growth Faster In States With Minimum Wages Higher Than $5.15-
-Keystone Research Center Releases Revised Fact Sheet on Effects of Raising Pennsylvania’s Minimum Wage- Read here:
KRC Minimum Wage Page


I have to believe that there maybe some small businesses that would require help at first. These are the companies that should get tax cuts.
Big companies, most of which doubled their profits last year, from the hardwork of it's employees, can eat it. They can afford to, and should.
This way, not only the rich would prosper, but also the lower income people. That would be good for the country, wouldn't it? According to the working models I've checked out, the answer is yes.

I also have to believe that the plans of the super rich are going to be a deciding factor in exactly how much of an increase will take place. Let's face it, almost every Congressperson stands to make more money off their assets with no wage raise for the poor. But that's just my opinion.