Ah, statistics ...
I reckon you could put up a case that the US is safer than Australia, based on number of hours flown, aircrafty registered and passengers carried etc. I'm not going to try, it'll just give me a headache, but .. I'm going to accept your figures Leadsled.... and assume it is the case.
HOWEVER, statistics is just that, figures.
What if the following is the real situation?
Say Australia has less MACs because it has a better system, not because it has less movements.
What if our movement rate suddenly increased ten fold? Would you expect our MACS to increase proportionately? What if they didn't, and they stayed at, say, NIL?
How would that affect airspace management by statistics?
Who says we can't compare by absolutes? That is, say, US has 100 deaths, Australia has 10 ... Australia is safer.
Who says the US has to have more deaths because it has more aircraft, movements, passengers etc?
My long winded point is .... who says the only safety comparison method has to be statistics?