[abecedarius]

That calculation assumes your judgement is better than the typical voter's. You should weigh it by P(better)-P(worse). (I'm not necessarily saying people with reason to think they have at-best average judgement should patriotically not vote; but the calculation is.)

(It's also worth considering a la Hofstadter/Yudkowsky that something like your decision process is instantiated in other people like you -- if you decide not to vote, many of them won't either, even with no causal link.)

[graue]

Also not everything is purely economic. If we assume that Candidate A would cost the US $7 trillion while B would be revenue neutral, then A's election would, on paper, be terrible. But how much would it actually make your life as an individual worse in a meaningful way? I suspect that in many cases, the practical impact of a presidential election on an individual's day-to-day life is relatively low. And that probably drives the intuitive notion that voting is irrational. Voting in local elections (mayor, city council, etc.) is probably more rational, both due to bigger impact of your vote and larger policy consequences for you as an individual.