One clarification with what you said, is that with the AMT ISO exercise is that you're not actually taxed on both the exercise and the sell. What's actually going on is that you're prepaying your taxes when you sell the stock. When you sell the shares, you'll only have to pay the taxes (either regular income or capital gains) based on the difference of the fair market value of the stock when exercised and when sold. If it went up, and you sold in less than year from exercise or less than 2 years from ISO grant, then it's regular income, otherwise it's capital gains. So you could actually get a tax refund when you sell. (Same is true if the market price actually declined between exercise and sell.)
The argument is that when you exercise, you received something of value for less than market and so you made money, but in reality you actually haven't realized any gains, and actually are at cash loss. I understand the argument, but I don't agree with it, because you did not actually realize any gain.
FWIW, San Jose's congresswoman Zoe Lofgren has repeatedly tried to fix the AMT and ISO taxation, but hasn't had much success.[0]
Where I disagree with you is thinking that private companies are going to "figure out a way to make this work" in a way that's beneficial for workers. I'm sorry, but I've never seen high finance work out for workers. It's basically a play for the financially desperate. It's no better than selling you shares on sharespost or something. If it's illiquid market, you're never going to get full value, and you know damn well those that are buying are going to expect a few multiples in gain. They can just wait a bit longer. Workers on the other hand, are busy trying to scrape together a down payment on a $2,000,000 shack in the valley.
[0] https://lofgren.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentI...