In my opinion, the best protection is to have valuable skills. I personally see no good reason for employment protection. I live in Germany, however, as a freelancer I get no protection at all. Why do some people deserve it, and others don't? What makes an "employee"?

I can understand having to "insure" against the risk of becoming too specialized. Like if you work for one company for years or decades, it might be difficult to find employment elsewhere. However, that insurance should be factored into the contracts "employees" are willing to accept. Likewise as a freelancer, I have to ask for a certain minimum amount of money to cover my risks.

Even for employees the protection might have downsides. They are stuck with inefficient coworkers who can't be fired.If you are young, you'll have to leave before people who are older. And employees might stick to jobs where they are not doing their best for too long. And overall, creation of business is hampered, which hurts everybody.

Just some thoughts.

Never fail to mark a net gain for humanity as financially ineffective obstacle. You know there exist some middle ground between dysfunctional socialism and brutal capitalism? Those places are comparably a paradise for common folks like most of us.

To be treated with respect like a human being and having overall a good life is still a privilege in 21st century.

What do you mean by "taking double in taxes"? Yes, parents also pay taxes, although usually less than single people because of the "split income". It is still a net transfer of money from single people to parents. (Not only for parental leave, also schools for example, or even free childcare in many places).