You are correct, and I don't assume it. But several people do.
"Doesn't this encourage entrepreneurship? It enables you to take the risk without fear of ending up homeless"
Yes, there are two sides to it.
Edit: I'll reply here why does this discourage entrepreneurship and my fault for not making this obvious
The sentiment of "failing at business" as a failure is much stronger. Yes, you won't end up homeless, but it doesn't mean the society (and the people close to you) "accepts" what happened.
Because you went for "computer stuff nonsense" instead of going for a traditional job.
The way this relates to the welfare structure is in their "origin" of having everything nice and square and predictable.
What's the other side? I don't see how it could discourage entrepreneurship at all.
It's about social/peer pressure.
Having lived in many countries across Europe, I can attest. Some countries are worse than others of course (the worst being the ex-commie/socialist ones).
This assumes that to be successful startups need to be working 80h/weeks. There are plenty of successful tech companies working much less than that. Treehouse for example works a 4 day week. Long hours are important when building the MVP and getting it out but after that I think you can work normal hours.
>> "4 - A more stable social foundation "discouraging" entrepreneurship (debatable)"
Doesn't this encourage entrepreneurship? It enables you to take the risk without fear of ending up homeless. For example if I were to start a new company there are programs I can sign up for which would give me £60 per week for 6 months + I believe I would still qualify for housing assistance (basically my rent would be paid for me). So as a single guy I could easily bootstrap a company with little-no risk.