Caring, the UK was a net contributor to the EU budget but this does not mean that it is not a net beneficiary. The UK benefitted enormously from being in the Single Market. Companies such as Honda, Nissan, Toyota etc could base their factories here and then service all of Europe. The same for banks, broadcasters, airlines, pharmaceutical companies etc. The UK was fantastically successful at attracting companies to be their EU base benefitting from tax revenues and employment worth many times the budget contribution.
All this is now starting to unravel.
There’s complaints about single market rules, but a lack of specific about which rules people object to. Is it environmental standards, no hormones in beef, equality legislation, clean beaches?? Not very clear.
We paid money for having common standards and a say in rules. We will ‘take back control’ of tedious bureaucracy and increase red tape ten-fold due to the need to fill in forms for almost half our exports when we didn’t before.
I don’t see any bullying by the EU. It simply is saying that if you don’t want to be part of the club, then you don’t get the benefits. And that Britain needs to respect international peace treaties.
And no, next to no economists think we will be better off on WTO terms. The only one, Patrick Minford, also notes that the UK’s manufacturing and agriculture sectors will be devastated.
But anyway, these are rational arguments. Surely, it’s much better just to say that we won WWII by ourselves so why do we need other countries??