[1] having just 1 creates lots of bigger issues ;
Availability (what happens when he's sick or on vacation).
Technical documentation (there is none, its all in his head).
Role transfer (when he leaves there is short intense handover, then nothing).
Opinioned design - he does it his way, no discussion necessary - some will be good, but some will be bad.
When he leaves, you can't replace him. 500k engineers won't work for a place where you just maintain the system the last guy designed and wrote - they want to design and write their own stuff from scratch.
I could go on, but programming depts of 1 are usually a bad idea...
That sounds reasonable, unless you're an elected government official in a state where salaries of government employees are public information. Local media outlets and your political opponents will have a field day over a government employee making a half-a-million dollar salary.
The public won't ever be able to understand or accept why one talented person should be made so wealthy in relation to the value they provide. However, the public will be fine with the same amount of money being spread out across 10 employees, since it still keeps all recipients in the poor house together with everyone else.
Do you or have you worked in a place where "engineers" make $500K? Have you thought about what they outsource to people making 1/10th or less, and why?
The bigger problem is the risk of corruption when you start hiring 500k engineers.