Would you work for minimum wage?

No.

Never.

Because their profits through broadcasting licensing, ancillary licensing such as toys, print materials and clothing, foodstuffs and other products can be enough to pay talent a far better living wage than minimum wage.
And these "profits" in this "proposal" are they from gross or net profits??
They'd better be from gross because no-one EVER sees a dime from net profits.

Is the percentage of the profits divided up per individual, or is a overall percentage taken and divided up equally to the talent as a whole?
What about talent that produce more completed footage than other talent--do they get a larger percentage, or is everything equal regardless?
What about talent with more experience?
Do they get the same percentage as talent with much less experience? What about seniority?
Are these percentages guaranteed, even if the company has a loss or sees lower than expected profits?

And this time after 2 years to work on one's own projects..........if the company is paying the talent, who owns the individual's projects??? Can they work on them on company time, in company facilities, with company supplies and equipment?? And the company is okay with the talent taking such produced work outside of the studio and selling them to the individual's benefit??

Since each series would be its own company, does that mean the talent have to be re-hired for each new series? What about talent that does not get hired on to a following series? Are their living arrangements severed automatically with the loss of employment??

There's other questions that beg asking......since the staff live in free housing, does that mean the housing is on studio property?
If so, then what are the daily working hours involved here for this minimum wage, especially during deadline crunches??
What about overtime hours?
What about working conditions? Will the studio provide supplies?

What about having families live with the talent in the housing?
What about pets?
Remember, if the talent do not get hired onto a following series, do they have to uproot their families to move out of the housing?
What about grocery access, if the site is a distance from groceries in the community.
What are the guarantees that housing will be in a good living standard?

If the company seeks to offer only minimum wage, who's to say they will not also compromise costs on the housing and maintenance of the housing?
Do talent have a say or choice in accommodations and considerations regarding fellow talent?
That is to say, can non-smoking/non-drinking talent have segregated living spaces away from smoking/drinking talent?
What about differing religious practises amongst talent?
People can be pigs, creeps, ass-holes and immature, and clustering them at home, as much as at work, can create many problems.
Since the housing is provide.....where's the incentive for people to take care of their spaces, like they would if they owned their homes?

In many jurisdictions, business and tax laws allow studios to deduction certain expenses to reduce the taxes paid on, and paying a straight liveable wage and providing adequate working set-ups can be a better arrangement than providing housing and health-care.
A freelance talent arrangement leaves taxes and health benefits to the talent, but also puts more dollars into their pockets each payday.

See......these are some of the hard questions that go along with an idea like you have put forward.
Minimum wage is, almost always, an excuse to not have to pay talent what they are worth. Its an excuse from productions that are too cheap to gather the funds to do animation properly......and make no mistake, animation is EXPENSIVE.
If you want to do it cheap, what you really want to do is make cheap-looking shit. Minimum wage isn't fostering talent, nor is housing them together. Its creating a factory environment, where the production is more important than the people producing the work. It's seen as de-humanizing and detrimental to creativity, as talent tend to be treated like cattle.
The concept works in cultures like third-world countries and the military because theirs is a de-emphasis on human individuality, and more on the group whole--which is something that tends to fly in the face of genuine creativity.
The duo of minimum wages, and group housing often lead to abuses because the talent are under-paid ( even if housing is "free"), and frequently considered to be more accessible to work, because they are nearby the studio ( regardless of the stated work hours).

This kind of question just opens up more questions, all of which needs answers as well before one could even begin to consider the initial question.

My opinion is that the idea sounds like the set-up for a third-world sweat-shop, with a studio living compound (essentially, a gulag) and can easily lead to the exploitation of talent.
I think the far better, and simpler, option is to eat the cost and pay talent what they are worth up front, and let them manage their own living arrangements.

Just as a follow-up, here's an example of paying talent what they are "worth":

Take a storyboard artist and have them do a storyboard. Typical deadline for a 22 minute show is about 4 weeks, sometimes 5 weeks, rate for a whole storyboard is about $8,000 to $9,000 ( on average)--so about $2000 a week.

If the 'board artist works only 1/2 a year ( 6 months) they can still afford to live where they want AND pay for their own private healthcare...and they are still taking in more money than a minimum wage rate ( $200 a week).
And $2000 a week can be seen as low-balling in many places!

Subsidized housing and healthcare just do not offset a minimum wage.

Conrad--
Well, I still have some issues with the ideas, still to the degree that I think its untenable.
But your last line spells out everything for me:
You don't work in the animation industry and your knowledge is limited.

Okay, that admission isolates a lot of things, and its why I'll encourage you to actually engage in the industry, work in it for a time ( as a creative, if you can) and to educate yourself as much as possible about how things work in the biz.

Here's an example of something to watch out for: the additional profits........"net profits", are something that becomes a problem because in actual practise, all the money from ancillary licensing doesn't come in all at once.....it can take months, years or decades to fully come into the company coffers, and not always in large sums.
So the studio is faced with two challenging options, if they want to divide and reward the profit in such a manner: they can either divide up a lot of little pies over a period of time, or they can wait and divide up one large pie all at once.
Now, some of those "little pies" can be so small that, literally, the divisions can be less than a dollar. That may not even be worth the administrative costs....especially done over time. The other headache is keeping tabs on talent and staff who may well move on to other things beyond the studio, and yet still be due their entitlements. These are a couple of reasons why this kind of royalty system doesn't work in the animation industry.
Additionally, waiting until all the monies come in can be years in the waiting.......and again, years after many of the talent and staff have moved on, and with monies that have gained no interest accrued ( in trust or otherwise) for anyone over that time.

And if someone, one of the talent perhaps, comes along and legally contests the royalties, based upon the notion that they deserve a larger percentage..then that will tied up the monies even longer.

As talent, working under that kind of arrangement, deferred rewards or royalties are NO incentive because they rarely, if ever, pay out.
I've worked once or twice under such arrangements in my early career, and I never saw a dime of the promised deferred money from those jobs. There's just no incentive to work for a lower rate at the outset, because the promises can be well-intentioned, but they have all the weight of a puff of smoke. I will not work under such arrangements now because of those reasons, and because I KNOW that the studios making such promises are hoping that nothing goes wrong to thwart them.
Well, something ALWAYS comes up. The studios exist to feed the studios FIRST, as an entity....that's why they are in business.....and the costs of running that business take precedent BEFORE paying talent. That's just the way it goes.
The studio can make deferred reward promises......and then discover that they need to replace their equipment to remain competitive in their service market......or that they have to make repairs to their premises, or that insurance premiums have risen, or they need to expand their floor space to accommodate more talent, or they didn't get a project they needed......pick a reason.
At the end of those reasons........whoops, all that money they were trying to save.....well, it "had to go back into the company" and they cannot make those deferred payments.
Oh well.

That happens on almost every occasion, because, again, the company exists to provide for its own survival as an entity, before it can pay staff or talents.
To operate otherwise, if the funds are not there.........is beyond foolish.
Studios undercut to get in work......they compete for projects......who offers the service for less gets the project. With a deferred pay arrangement, how does a studio pay out royalties if there's a loss right at the start?
Do you expect the investors to cough up the money?? What investor in their right mind is going to take losses, which can likely be constant? They'll seek a profit and they'll insist up cutting anything which will prohibit those profits.
That's modern business and that is also the animation business.

But do not take my word for it........educate yourself. Get into the biz, work it, experience it......see if what I have written holds true.

The main problem with your proposal is the fact that I didn't spend a life time honing my skills and put myself in thousands of dollars worth of debt learning to do something the average person can't do just to work somewhere that pays less than the fast food industry.

I'm just saying.