A few thoughts in response… Social Security, as it was conceived coming out of the Great Depression here in the U.S., was not about socializing risk in the “insurance” sense. It was about providing means for older workers to leave the workforce, therefore opening up opportunities for younger workers. But I think we are using the term differently; your use seems broader, and is what I understand unemployment insurance to be (and I have no argument with unemployment insurance).
You are also viewing the shock of losing a job as a uniformly negative dynamic. You will have no problem here in the U.S. meeting small business owners who are thankful (looking back) that they lost the job they had before the shock forced them out of their comfort zone. In many of these cases, these folks saw value propositions others were missing. As a friend of mine who carved out a niche selling unique chili peppers to restaurants explained it to me: “Look for what’s missing… and then provide it.”
And, apologies for the bluntness, you are seriously misinformed about the beer market — at least here in the United States. Budweiser and Jim Beam, for example, are just now releasing a bourbon barrel-aged beer. To craft beer aficionados across the U.S. this is rather amusing— barrel aged beer has been a “thing” here in the U.S. for quite some time. (That is an entirely different study in value — Goose Island Brewery stumbled upon a new form of value in barrels which had already been used to age bourbon and otherwise would have ended up in a landfill.)
My definition of “wealth” is most certainly not unique — it would have been considered pedestrian and rather obvious by my grand-parents’ generation. Fiat money printed at political will is what has divorced the idea of money from its necessary antecedent — the creation of wealth and subsequent exchange of value. And none of this has anything to do with the labor theory of value. Again, I have taken pains to differentiate wealth and value. Labor is what creates value (I largely agree with the labor theory). But the recognition of that value in the mind of the consumer depends entirely on someone prior having taken some raw material and made it useful in some manner.
Lastly, “entrepreneur” can be a pretty flexible concept. Someone who decides to get into farming can certainly be considered one — and also be a wealth creator as they take the raw materials of the earth and produce something useful. But, again using the coffee shop analogy, the coffee shop owner sees a variety of value propositions to offer to the consuming public. They, too, are entrepreneurs and are delivering value. In no way does my thesis diminish the work of the barista (or bartender). But the value proposition recognized and delivered by the coffee shop owner simply does not exist without the prior work of the farmer and potter.