Being employed in one company is more stable and less risky, than being an individual freelance-worker.
The "needing to find additional employment" are less frequent but much higher impact for an employee than for a freelancer.
Yes, if you live in a country with good worker protection (in the US a lot of "salaried" work is effectively freelance).
> if you get laid off then you lose 100% of your income instead of just a part
Yes, if. With good protections and a solid company choice, such a scenario has a likelihood approaching zero.
> The "needing to find additional employment" are less frequent but much higher impact for an employee than for a freelancer.
I would say the freelancer has a higher impact of this, because their entire work history is filled with needing to find new work. That is the nature of doing work without an enduring relationship.
To extend this, in the US, this is pretty much every reasonably well paying position which falls into this category, so everything is gatekept by at-will, salary, anf exempt status. In principle none of these statuses are inherently bad. In practice, they're abused left and right by employers who have historically had the leverage when it mattered. At-will being highly standard anymore is sort of backfiring now during the pandemic with labor shortages now that labor has leverage for the first time in decades, so employers are getting a bit of the taste of the leverage they created against labor with people dropping and transitioning regularly to stay ahead of inflation or find better opportunities.
People get made redundant all the time, in economies all around the world, with all kinds of worker protections.
Most freelancers are now employed full-time (like permanent employee) and can quickly change job until they find one with good work/life balance [1].
[1] https://amaca.substack.com/p/how-i-got-wealthy-without-worki...