I don't know what you mean. When I was working for someone else, I was paying taxes and that. I also never knew when my job was going to get cut out of the picture (I know that this is not the same for many others, but in my case it was).
When working for a conventional employer under regular arrangements, one typically pays some sort of income tax. In comparison, client-based/indirect employment transfers costs(such as taxes and benefits) onto yourself (or an Employer of Record). That is what I meant.
As for not knowing when your job gets cut, flexibility is not your friend in that regard. It's the upstream employer's friend.
I think the opposite is true. Rather than work with the same 10 or so people at a job that we all hate, I work with many clients that all love it when I come in.
However, you still have the issue that you're viewed as being separate versus being part of the employer. They might be close clients, but they are still clients.
On the other hand, being part of the actual (not "of Record") employer removes that distance. You're viewed as being on the same team.
I agree, but I feel that mindset is fading away for the IT world.
Not entirely sure. I've worked for good employers that were quite large and did decently for their own if not good.
There's a point in every company's growth, where one person can no longer do all of the work, but you cannot afford to pay someone else for a full-time position. In this way, it's important to work with other solo IT guys in a symbiotic way.
Also known as the European system of labor(contracts and employers that hate FTE with a passion) with all the negative implications. It's the system that should have by all rights stayed out of the US. Now that it is starting to come to the US, it can be seen as Trouble Ahead.