It doesn't really work to have government employees. Suppose the FBI wants to build an office in Texarkana. Are they supposed to directly hire a bunch of peopl

It doesn't really work to have government employees. Suppose the FBI wants to build an office in Texarkana. Are they supposed to directly hire a bunch of people in Texarkana? Should the people who install the carpet get an exemption from the agency's normal background check, medical exam, and firearms training? Hiring competent people requires competent managers, in this case for construction, so they'd need to hire before they can hire. Suppose the EPA also decides to build an office in Texarkana. Does the EPA need to directly hire people too, maybe competing with the FBI and trying to swipe employees? There is also the huge issue of government workforce rules. In the business world, bad employees tend to get fired. Businesses don't last if they tolerate too many bad employees, which effectively fires the whole company. Government isn't about to shut down, and there are numerous rules which make it near-impossible to get rid of worthless and negative-value employees. Hiring is also limited by low pay. Corruption thrives when pay is below the norm for the market. The competent people won't stay. It's a miracle government can function at all. Raising the pay gets taxpayers furious, in part because taxpayers see the corruption and incompetence. The answer is thus, sadly, to minimize the problem by minimizing the employees. There isn't a better choice that is realistic.