The basic idea is that you measure the (tiny) chance of your vote making a difference against the expected benefit. If the benefit is just to make your life $300 better, then it’s not worth it. But if the benefit is to make life 10c better for each of 300 million citizens, then it works out.

but it is rational to vote, with these same odds [1 in 10 million], if your goal is to make the country and world a much better place.

Can you please elaborate on how this assertion from above is true? I can’t follow the logic. Thanks.