With all due respect, that's probably because you're not someone who's having to survive on it.
"That said, putting the minimum wage to an amount that is surviable at 40 hours a week removes people on the margins that would benefit from a job that paid these than a living wage."
I don't believe that population is significant, or more significant than those that do need it to be a living wage.
"James just got done serving 5 years for felony distribution of crack. Seeing his son only once a month has made James decide to go on the straight and narrow from now on. As an ex-con it is hard for him to find a job. In fact because ex-con tend to be bad employees most business don't bother. If there was no minimum wage a business could hire James at a rate of the average ex-con and he could prove himself a good worker and move to a better paying job. I think such a job should exist for James."
I do not believe that having a non-living wage job would help, because James would still need to survive, and on a non-living wage, he's going to have to supplement that income somewhere. A better thing for James would be "Ban the Box" laws, which prevent potential employers from asking about criminal history if it's not relevant to the job.
"I think these are two examples of productive economic activity that would otherwise be impossible if the minimum wage was set to a living wage."
And I don't. Just about every example for why it shouldn't happen comes down to business wants cheap labor. And that's not an argument that I am sympathetic to.