That’s the wrong question to ask. “important people are more likely to be in a plane than unimportant people” is valid as a partial explanation only if we assume that all aircrafts have similar crash probabilities and are flown with a similar number of passengers.
The frequency with which I personally fly does not impact how often other people fly. All it does is give you one data point on how often other people in my situation might fly, and we don’t know how many others are in my situation, so that information is also useless.
Let us assume 2 people fly in planes. One of them does so 10 times a month. The other 10 times a year. The risks are higher for the 10 times a month flyer.
In a world where there are exactly two people who ever fly, that would make sense. Now what if there are 12 people who fly 10 times a year a 1 person who flies 10 times a month? Will it be more likely that someone in the group of 12 dies in a plane crash, or the one person who flies 10 times a month?
I see what you’re saying but it’s splitting hairs. The rich guy uses an airplane more often that others do so he’s more likely to die in a plan crash simply because he’s more likely to be a plane the first place.
Splitting hairs is when the difference is meaningless. The difference we’re discussing is between answering the question and not answering it.
Others in the thread have given an answer that actually makes sense, and it’s that wealthier people who fly frequently tend to fly in smaller private aircrafts, and those are more likely to crash than commercial flights.
Because those important people are more likely to be in a plane than unimportant people.
Commercial planes are constantly coming and going through every major airport. Do these wealthy people really collectively fly more than that?
How often does Bezos end up in a plane? How often are you in a plane?
That’s the wrong question to ask. “important people are more likely to be in a plane than unimportant people” is valid as a partial explanation only if we assume that all aircrafts have similar crash probabilities and are flown with a similar number of passengers.
The frequency with which I personally fly does not impact how often other people fly. All it does is give you one data point on how often other people in my situation might fly, and we don’t know how many others are in my situation, so that information is also useless.
Let us assume 2 people fly in planes. One of them does so 10 times a month. The other 10 times a year. The risks are higher for the 10 times a month flyer.
In a world where there are exactly two people who ever fly, that would make sense. Now what if there are 12 people who fly 10 times a year a 1 person who flies 10 times a month? Will it be more likely that someone in the group of 12 dies in a plane crash, or the one person who flies 10 times a month?
I see what you’re saying but it’s splitting hairs. The rich guy uses an airplane more often that others do so he’s more likely to die in a plan crash simply because he’s more likely to be a plane the first place.
Splitting hairs is when the difference is meaningless. The difference we’re discussing is between answering the question and not answering it.
Others in the thread have given an answer that actually makes sense, and it’s that wealthier people who fly frequently tend to fly in smaller private aircrafts, and those are more likely to crash than commercial flights.
They fly small planes, in a lot of cases they fly themselves.
You never learn the name of the “unimportant” people that die in air crashes
We might not learn their names, but we definitely learn about the aircraft and how many people died.
If its of a certain size yes, but the planes that actually crash everyday don’t get reported widely because they’re tiny aircraft
Now that I had ent considered. There’s importance squared. A second layer.
I’m tired of humans. I’m now identify as one of those gay frogs Alex Jones is so strangely passionate about.