But if you try to make that argument on HN, a bunch of people will yell at you about how Boeing and the FAA are evil for putting cost savings over safety.
"you don't need fuel for the descent though"
You can, but it's not a fair comparison. 99.9% of deaths of railroad transport is people killed while crossing rails - e.g. pedestrians.
If you consider rail passengers only, it is far lower than airlines and cars, something on the scale of 2-3 people/year.
Airplanes are cheating in the sense that there are no pedestrians in the air to collide with.
0: https://www.aopa.org/training-and-safety/air-safety-institut...
Interesting stat.
If airliners were only as safe as walking, nobody would use them, because you'd expect to have at least a minor accident (like a sprained ankle) when walking 2000 miles. A similar argument can be made for cars and trains (just a magnitude less distance per trip and consequently a smaller chance of injury).
It's a novel idea in terms of emissions avoidance, though: couple the externalities to personal risk.