Consider posting what you did.

There is also the "unexpected" or "unknown" and social character of the internet.

and they’re still really unlikely

1 in 1000 is not really unlikely if it is in regards to your life ending.

It would mean that two out of three families would lose a close person within a 30 year generation due to cars, instead of only a small percentage. This is the power of the 17 times!

The alternative of train rides would mean that within a generation virtually no family is affected by car deaths.

There is quite a bit wrong with your comment. The odds don't change whether you give them in km or billion kms. However "the odds of dying on each of these" is wrong: Those are not the odds.

As you wrote what you wrote it would mean that only 2 people in the whole US population of 300 million would die on a car.

(annualized) death rate was 1.66 per 10,000 vehicles

The 17times more likely is telling the truth. Of course you could do look at miles consumed per mode of transport, but the point will remain that trains are much more safer (and some people die on them rather by old age, than accidents).

In addition the way you present the numbers with leading zeroes means you have no academic experience in the field of data presentation. Which shows.

Thanks I try to achieve at least 30% good and 70% bad comments.

For questions like that pretty much no newspaper is trustworthy.

However you made a claim that is a known propaganda lie, I gave you sources, yet you do not say: "I was wrong, I will delete that sentence from my post and make a disclaimer to it!", no you try to defend your lie.

You say "while it wasn't specifically true, you could imagine that over 70 years in some countries of 1.2 billion it might've be true somewhere!"

Again, family of mine was prosecuted in the liberal western FRG for homosexuality and sent to prison. 30 years earlier they would've ended up in death camps.

The mother of a friend of mine was homeless in the GDR. She got a flat, she got education, she got work, she got a nice family, she had healthcare, they bought a house. My friend is much worse off now.

Che on the other hand was a homophobic bigot who attempted to eliminate the queer people from Cuba

Liar. You are spewing propaganda. You could read AskHistorians for that.

You are quite reactionary. Seek groups and listen, you need to be participating in collectives to grow as a person.

That site has yellow fascists / yellow monarchists, "An"Caps listed, they aren't anarcho anything.

That is not correct. Black and red has a variety of meanings, anarcho syndicalist ones being part of them. Anarcho communism is now more common for that combination. I do absolutely agree with you that they would join in and kick the gadsen person and my gay comrades would join in, too.

But France wasn’t the only example of a republic at that time, and what even inspired the French revolution was the United States establishing itself after breaking away from England

That is very wrong and not historical correct. However you don't talk to historians, but think for yourself without evidence or archives so you will never accept that.

And yet throwaway is a racist and aligns well with nationalists:

This shit is why not every migrant is good. They bring their shitty homophobic culture with them.

They would be cheered for with that sentence in Nazi bars.