Treece777, Your English leaves a lot to be desired, go peddle your rubbish elsewhere.

Hasbeen,
"So you are telling me Aidan, that a 70% reduction in manning, [or overmanning as usual with government union controlled industry], has not caused a considerable reduction in phone costs."

No.
I'm telling you that better technology is the main reason fewer people are needed.

I don't know if this "government union controlled industry" is something that actually existed before the reforms of the 1980s, or if it's just a figment of your imagination. I suspect the latter.

Don't get me wrong - I'm certainly not saying there've never been efficiency gains as a result of privatisation. There often have. But there have also been false economies, and some cost reductions have been at the expense of quality.

Come off it Aiden. Here's a little bit of history

Once upon a time there was a double public phone booth in front of my father's post office/hardware store in a Sydney suburb. The government owned, union controlled PMG decided to paint it.

Day one; 2 utes turn up, one with a driver & linesman, one with a driver & technician. Both drivers sit in utes all day. The linesman disconnects the line, & the technician removes the phones & wiring.

Day two; 3 utes turn up, 3 drivers, linesman, technician & carpenter. After lunch a glazier & a painter arrive, with 2 more drivers.

Day three. As above less glazier & his driver.

Day six; after weekend, as day one, 6 men, 3 utes to hang the doors, & refit phones.

My father, fascinated by all this, worked out it had cost 101 hours labour to paint a couple of back yard toilet sized phone booths.

Technology had nothing to do with all this, just bureaucratic mentality, union bloody mindedness, & our stupidity in allowing it.

The reason we have to get rid of government industry is they all end up like this. Even government funded companies, [think sub building] end up the same god awful rip off.

Hasbeen,
If your "little bit of history" is accurate then clearly it's the latter.

But your absolutely ludicrous claim that "they all end up like this" makes you look like you must have slept through the 1980s and '90s! Gross overmanning in government industry is a thing of the distant past.

The problems with the submarines were totally different. Most very large projects have large teething problems, and the submarines were no exception. The problems were fixed, but our production run was so short that the cost per submarine remained high. And the failure of governments to fund a continuous program of shipbuilding means that expertise has ben lost and there's probably more cost overruns ahead.

CORRECTION:
My above post should of course read:

Hasbeen,
If your "little bit of history" is accurate then clearly it's the FORMER...

I unreservedly apologise for any offence or confusion caused.