This really just raises the question on why employees don't get a share of profits.

They take on all the same risk as owners do

Most small businesses require the owner to take significant financial risk, or work for free for years or more.

Each growth stage presents tough choices of additional risk, as well.

An employee doesn't shoulder any of this. There is a world of difference!

It's because the law and financial system exalt capital at the expense of everyone else. There's no reason that labor couldn't translate into equity.

Also, the current system enforces the artificial scarcity of capital available to those who need to work for a living instead of living off of their assets.

It's certainly not the same risk. If a business goes bust the owners lose capital, the employees lose opportunity cost at worst.

If a business goes bust, those losses can be written of at tax time. A worker losing their job faces homelessness, the inability to see a doctor or pay for their medications, and hunger.

To avail the benefit of writing off taxes, the ex-business owner requires future income. Who's to say that he/she won't be unemployed for a long while after devastating their life savings?

Then they can get a job. Why are they taking on risks that they can't bear with their investments?

What does write off mean to you? If you lose money the government is not giving you money for that loss.

The vast majority of businesses are small businesses, if they go broke the owner is just as broke as the employees.

You know how people avoid being impacted by a business going bankrupt? They don't take jobs there.

Jobs at more stable places are available and people will take them. The businesses need to fail or be sold.

There will always be businesses on the margin that barely survive, and you want as many of those as possible always to increase employment and wages, even if your world vision is only pro-worker.