

So the citizens still have to physically vote even though there’s only 1 option?
Yep! Technically tho, they can cross out the name of the candidate to vote “no”.

See that little table to the right? They have to use the red pen sitting on top of it. But don’t worry, it’s “anonymous”!
Apparently in more recent elections, “no” votes just go in a separate bin?

It also appears to double as a census, since voting is mandatory. That same Wikipedia article says elections are watched by the inminban to keep an eye out for no-shows.
To be completely fair, there is apparently one position in local elections that can actually have two candidates. It’s mostly a figurehead that’s subordinate to the unelected mayor, but hey! Two names on the ballot!
Can’t find anything about how ballots are counted, though that doesn’t exactly surprise me.







Folks. Publicly traded companies will ALWAYS compare the expected value of breaking the law with compliance.
Say it costs $100 million to follow the law. Breaking it comes with a $300 million fine, but only a 20% chance of getting caught.
They compare a 100% chance of paying $100 million to a 20% chance of paying $300 million.
Average cost of following the law: $100 million
Average cost of breaking it: $60 million
If we’re gonna do capitalism (which I would rather we not, for the record!), we have to make that expected value calculation break in favor of following regulations. If it is cheaper to break the law than to follow it, you’re not just losing money by complying: you’re giving ground to your competition. Fines need to be massive. Infractions need to get caught and punished. Executives need to be held personally accountable. Corporations need to be dissolved. Fines cannot be just the cost of doing business.