OK Tok, let's work though this, so miners are buyers of DASH from the blockchain.  You reason that because miners have bought equipment and have ongoing costs in electricity and rent and wages that this expenditure is the same as 'buying' DASH out of the blockchain.  The place where we fall over is I and Ryan and the community are seeing this as cost to the network, but you see it as investment.  Correct me if I am wrong.

So moving forward, the miner 'buys' DASH from the blockchain at his costs.  I get that, he now holds DASH.  He pays his bills.  Now, what comes next?  Above you said he only makes tiny profits, so I assume you mean he goes to exchange and places a limit sell that is X% above his costs and waits for it to fill?  He does not sell below costs, because this is a model and that would be foolish right?

Couple of things here, in an ideal world, that might hold true, however, have you ever heard of 'miner capitulation' ?  This is when unprofitable miners sell stock for a loss to at least recoup some money, it tends to happen in corrections or a bear market.  How might that affect your perfect model?

Also, have you considered that the difficulty is not static, it will increase and decrease over time effectively making it cheaper or more expensive to mine, so if miners can't get the price they were after and start selling for less (they have to sell, they have bills to pay) then the difficulty goes down, in order to give new miners a shot at turning a profit.

The idea that miners only sell for a perfect profit seems wrong to me, in fact, I see miners passing on the costs of their operation because they are forced sellers on the market that matters most to us (and them) the exchanges.

The daily cost of electricity and rent and wages and mining hardware are absolutely born by the incoming investors into a POW coin like DASH.  In your order with your creative accounting, you flip the sign on a loss to a profit, financial alchemy!  Who do you think is ultimately paying for the miner's bills?

Now for everyone else, don't get me wrong, I am POW maximalist, I believe it is the best way to secure and decentralise a blockchain and worth the cost, however, I strongly believe the cost should match the value and I see the law of diminishing returns applies here, if DASH is secured by mining to  99.99999% chance it will never have a double spend, but adding another 9 implies we need to 100X our costs, which it does, then I don't consider that worth the extra expense.