What if we did the minimum wage increase but gave business with less than 5000 employees a break on the payroll tax? That was part of American Jobs Act which isn't going anywhere fast but couldn't we package that part of the AJA with a minimum wage increase?
So, to offest the cost of the higher wages to the business owner, you would want the government to completely offest the wage increase by lowering payroll taxes? How is that not a government sponsored transfer of wealth? Wouldn't it be easier to just give another "earned income" credit to those earning minimum wage? The impact would be the same.
I really suggest taking a different look at jobs. Instead of looking as what does the job give the worker, look at it as what does the worker give the employer? The employee should be creating value and will be payed based on the value he/she creates. If you are in a job that creates little value, or you as the worker can be easily replaced, why should you be payed more? Perhaps people should focus on how they can create value.
Finally, I know few major CEO's who comment on political issues if their company would not be impacted. In this case, Starbucks knows it is in better shape to keep costs down and margins high even if costs increase. Besides, I think most of their lower hourly workers earn about $9 an hour. So, an increase may not impact them much.