The tradeoff is that you have to go through the same grueling process every time you change jobs. I think the tradeoff is well worth it and would not like to see software become more like medicine where you have to put in 10+ years of schooling to prove your worth.
If you were a doctor, you would have gone through 4-5 years of supervised residency after medical school (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residency_(medicine)) to guarantee some minimum level of competency before becoming a practitioner. Pay is notoriously poor and the hours are extremely long.
Programmers have it exceedingly good and the only reason for that is that software is still in its growth phase. I doubt we'll all be still riding the gravy train in another 25-50 years.
There are plenty of applicants who just can't do the job, and the cost of restarting the search all over again is high. It's important for a team to vet their new hires.
While that definitely matches my observations, the current interview grind:
a) filters out people who can do the job too
and
b) somehow also manages not to filter out people who can't, either.