Edit: also, I can't find the study, but I know there was one done about statewide minimum wage changes in states with large differences in cost of living. It's a smaller scale version of what you'd see on a nationwide hike given the differences in cost of living (i.e,, NYC vs Buffalo). Generally speaking, businesses adjusted.
E2: here's a study that isn't the one I was looking for, but is topical: https://www.epi.org/publication/webfeatures_viewpoints_raisi...
No it's not, it's proposing that one of the things they'll do in response is hire fewer people. Which will absolutely happen in a non-zero fraction of cases. The only question is how big a fraction.
Sources:
1. https://www.nelp.org/wp-content/uploads/NELP-Data-Brief-Rais...
2. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2705499
3. https://americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/kf/minimumwa...
4. https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economic-issues-watch/hi...
These studies are obviously politically and progressively motivated (coming from firms such as american progress) so we have to assume a large scale national increase of minimum wage as significant as this would have unintended negative consequences.
So really, the only benefit is a psychological trick. Simply handing out money to underpaid workers would drive inflation much more effectively and do the exact same thing.
A lot of research suggests the effect is pretty small when the increase in minimum wage is small compared to the market wages for unskilled labor.
But there isn't a lot of data about a large change in minimum wage that affects a substantial number of people.
If there was no downside, why not $100 an hour?