Agreed, but I was implying that he didn't simplify it nearly enough. I actually understood the parent post more clearly than this ELI5 version.
It turns out that one of the simplifying assumptions that physicists have been making over the years does change the result. Giving up the "spare change" does make you "go bankrupt." In this case, ignoring small-scale turbulence makes you lose a significant amount of heat. But figuring that out required some really hairy math and a butt-load of computing power.
Is that simple enough for you?