It hasn’t always been that way. Companies use to hire their own janitors and cooks. If a school system can figure out how to hire teachers, principals, custodians, electricians, bus drivers, cooks, etc. I’m sure all of the smart people at Google can.

Those companies could be subsidiaries of Google. It could operate independently with its own P&L.It could share services such as Payroll, IT and Finance.

This is essentially Google saying, these companies are operating too efficiently and must increase costs to continue operating inside of Google.

But Google takes it to an extreme -- roughly half[0] of their personnel are contractors.

[0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-25/inside-go...

but its not just cooks. It is software test engineers, Devops engineers, front end developers, ux designers, desktop support, technical recruiters, receptionists, admins, content moderators, search raters, map verification specialists, language translators - many of these are core to any tech company- the only thing common is that they are available more easily and can be paid less as contractors or h1b consultants

Why do they need investors?

Why is it okay when they're hired using a subcontractor company?

Is it investors being stupid (unlikely?)

Is subcontractor headcount/cost not public information?

Are contractors actually good?

Are contractors instead of employees good for google, but detrimental to society as whole? (something investors aren't known to care about, so it makes sense).

Some other possibility I haven't considered?