Adam Smiths' theory of the general glut is they won't. It's a vicious cycle effect that can lead to phenomena called recessions and depressions resulting in strangely both unemployment and idle factories (able workers + money to pay them and nobody hiring due to lack of demand).

Some really ardent neo-classicalists say they don't exist but I haven't read their evidence carefully enough to speak to it (here's an intro by Rothbard if you're interested: https://mises.org/library/says-law-markets)

I personally think some of the most notable Austrians had a bad habit of using arguments of convenience to defend the financial interests of the wealthy benefactors who funded their institutions and reversed their arguments when expedient but that's a separate conversation.

Being an entrepreneur is risky? What risk does an entrepreneur take? That they'll lose all their capital, right? Well, that just puts them on even footing with workers, who are people who have no way to make money other than selling their labor.

The majority of people are workers. You're telling me the "risk" an entrepreneur takes is being on equal footing with their (former) employees? Man, you're making a great argument against capitalism, if that's what you're saying.

Not even. It's a corporation you can walk away from it.

The risk narrative is the current preferred reason to justify gross inequality caused by power imbalances.

It ignores that every participant is taking a risk. It's just some manufactured narrative designed so that we'd think "well alright" and not question the unjustifiable disproportionate gross inequity of all the reward going to those with the smallest risk because of how structural power works.

The lowest wage worker living paycheck to paycheck has wayyyy more risk exposure than someone like me who has skated by trivially without a paycheck for over a year. The idea that my investment portfolio entitles me to the profits because of some immense risk I'm taking is clearly totally manufactured bullshit that's used to shape public opinion.

I could lose every penny without affecting my quality of life at all. Literally zero effect. The risk is purely abstract. It's not material in the slightest

I actually mostly agree with you: more workers should try entrepreneurship, it's not as risky or as hard as it may seem.

Entrepreneurs also risk their time which employees usually prefer to sell at guaranteed return. But some choose middle ground by accepting a mixed (cash + stock) compensation.

I believe we, as a society, would gain more if more people would "risk" the entrepreneurial path.