To me it looks like you two are talking past each other. In fact, I think you're both right. gruez point can be summarized as "if you're having a minimum wage job, your loss at the end of the month is smaller compared to having no income at all" [0], which is a possible interpretation of the comment that sparked this thread [1]. This is also the reason he does not account for food, while you do. Your (inetknght's) point is that "with a minimum wage job, you'll make a loss at the end of the month". As far as I read it, gruez actually doesn't try to make the point that a minimum wage job is sustainable, so there's no contradiction.

[0] Compared to, for example, driving for Uber, where at the end of the month the cost for car+fuel+maintenance might cost you more than you earned, increasing your net loss.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26995335

This line in particular:

> There are a lot of jobs where your net pay is below zero, long term, when you factor in the external costs associated with working, such as needing transportation.