This seems like a rather naive view to me (and one that I also used to have). As a business owner you are far more accountable to a far greater number of people than you ever will be as an employee. You have the authority to make more decisions, but it’s hardly a “whatever you like” sort of situation. Nearly all of the decisions you make will just be about balancing all the responsibilities you have to other people. As a business owner you might have more authority, but there are many areas where an employee would typically have more freedom. An employee has the freedom to leave all their work problems at the office and go home at the end of the day, or take a vacation. An employee has the freedom to leave the moment a better opportunity comes along. An employee has the freedom to only worry about the problems they’re specifically employed to solve. A business owner would not be expected to have any of that. If your primary concern is a greater level of autonomy at work, then you’d typically be better off seeking and employer who will give you more autonomy than you would be owning a business.
> An employee is beholden to his/her manager, but cannot "call the shots" but simply takes orders.
This is true only insofar as the value you bring to the company cannot be outweighed by the shots you want to call.
If you are, for lack of a better term, that good (and while I have a dim view of VC-silly startups, the successful ones I know really are that good), that can be a very wide remit. It very well might be "wide enough," even, and it's worth considering.
a founder has the power to make changes to his job. An employee doesn't.
Even tho a founder is beholden to their investors, board and customers, the founder is also empowered (after all, he/she calls the shots).
An employee is beholden to his/her manager, but cannot "call the shots" but simply takes orders.