Again, if it's not going to be enough to live on (and is shouldn't be used as such) what point is there in having a minimum wage at all?
In my opinion, the minimum wage SHOULD be enough to live on. The problem is that a lot of people making minimum wage aren't living within their means. This is also a problem with people making much more than the minimum wage. If you make $7.25 an hour don't expect to be able to buy an IPad. If you do want one, learn a skill and earn it.
It want you to hear me out as I explain why that doesn't logistically work. If you stipulate that a person should make at least enough to live on, that is going to result in extremely unfair compensation for individuals doing the same work. No two people are going to have the same living expenses, yet if you insist that people should make enough to live on, then that would require paying people who day the same job different wages.
The other problem is the immorality of it. If you say someone has the right to make at least enough to live on, that would mean it is not their obligation to provide that for themselves. Yet that money has to come from somewhere. In this case, the employer. So while you say one person is entitled to make at least enough to live on doing the bare minimum, that requires that someone else earn that for them, plus enough for themselves to live on. The proposal is a paradox. For one to acquire that which you say they are entitled to, someone else must actually do what you say they should NOT be required to do.