Minimum wage is a starting point, not a career salary

Okay, so I'm reading this book Nickel and Dimed: on (not) getting by in America by Barbara Ehrenreich. I feel I have to give her credit for the work that she has done, and I'm not criticizing her journalism; I even think that her words would resonate with more people if written today than it did ten years ago when she wrote it.
I do, however, feel like there is another side of the story, that she is missing altogether. First off, she set up some ground rules for her experiment: like she would always have a car. There are seven people in our household and we have one vehicle (by choice). When my husband needs it, the children and I find things to do at home or we pile into strollers and wagons and we walk; my point? I think lots of people get by without cars, and I would have to say that even one for our family is a luxury that we pay highly for, not an absolute necessity. Skipping to the third rule (I'll get back to the second) Never be hungry! No missed meals for her; if she was hungry, and didn't have enough money, then she would use here ATM card and cheat. I'll talk about food options later.
Her second rule was that she would always have shelter; her experiment was set up for thirty days in each city, if she paid by the week or night and couldn't make enough to cover it, the experiment in that city would have failed. I'm not saying she should go without shelter, although there are many inexpensive options, but I do think that the major flaw in this type of experiment is the thirty day rule. She mentions at one point that she is working in a place where benefits don't begin until you've worked there for ninety days. This seems reasonable to me, since benefits like insurance and retirement plans are for long term employees, not transients.
I've made many notes, and I'm barely beginning to read this book, but for this post, I want to primarily discuss her premise; "...could a single mother leaving welfare survive without government assistance...". Her experiment to determine the answer is a thirty day test. I think that is unreasonable.
When I got married, my husband & I were both working for a fast food business, I was making minimum wage and he was making about 1 1/2 times that because he had gained "experience" and a "promotion". This didn't happen in the first thirty days. I was living in a basement (cheap campus life) and he was living with his parents (even cheaper campus life). After getting married, we bought a home together (for about the same monthly cost as I had been paying in rent; but we added twenty minutes to his commute in trade). Eventually, he worked his way up in the company so that I was able to quit working altogether, and after seventeen years, he retired from his position as a store manager - but he started in high school as a minimum wage employee.
Minimum wage is intended to be a starting point, a wage at which teenagers at their first job get paid, or someone who is still learning how to do the job gets paid. If you have been at a job for a year or more and you have gained experience, you show up on time and you work hard, but have not been given any kind of pay increase since you started, then I assure you that you can begin looking for a new job, as there are plenty of companies out there that will compensate their employees for a job well done. Just don't expect it to happen in the first thirty days!