By your logic, having one small group would be most efficient. Which makes perfect sense, given the tiny size of the US government, in Trumpistan logic.
I didn't make any claims about what is the most efficient number of groups working towards efficiency.
I also didn't make any claims which groups should exist, solely based on the name of the group.
You're the one who made an argument along those lines. Not me. As if, a group named for efficiency couldn't possibly be inefficient. Or, that 2 groups working for efficiency would somehow be automatically better than 1 group.
