[acdha]

> No agency would voluntarily modernize systems, which would inevitably reduce head count and put half of them out of jobs.

What facts are you basing this on? Have you worked at one of those agencies? Do you have reason the believe that the many agencies whose senior leadership have asked Congress to fund modernization programs were being disingenuous?

If not, consider that the people who told you this were not acting in good faith and had motives other than government efficiency.

[BluSyn]

Real modernization of systems would result in efficiencies that allow for reduction in staff. Tech exists to be a lever on productivity. This almost never happens; historically bureaucratic modernization efforts only proceed if absolutely necessary for core functions, and strangely seem to result in higher head counts. IRS is a great example of this. Their headcount has doubled while they supposedly "modernized". Digital systems should increase productivity of the average IRS employee, instead they just invent more busy work.

[acdha]

Do you have any experience with this or are you just basing it on vibes? For example, I know people who’ve worked on modernization projects and they’ve never had opposition on the grounds you’re claiming: the problems are usually funding (Congress has to allocate money for it) and the significant cost and risk due to contracting the work out rather than hiring technical staff (also Congress).

The IRS is notable because they’ve been requesting funding for modernization since the 90s.