Why didn't we get facts like this in advance?

[Somewhereovertheroad]

HMRC projects additional Brexit red tape will cost UK businesses £6.5 billion/year. NHS estimates cost of satisfying new visa requirements on behalf of staff at £490 million/year.
*
That's nearly £7 billion in annual Brexit costs, or close to the £9 billion we pay as EU members!*

Why wasn't the homework done so we could have known things like this in advance?

assuming it's true

I think it is pretty evident that the UK wants "change" and has done for a long time. It hasn't done so much being within the EU, so many want to try outside of it.

Many would like to try.

jas - we live in the same area :)

Ha ha! weird! i love being back, after years away!

Yes Change can be good but it needs planning, brexit should be done over a 5 to 10 year timescale, if at all.

Thinking of some solutions to our inevitable 'NHS crisis' - as the UK apparently isn't as "nice" as other places/countries and no non-UK 'medic' would dream of coming here in light of how 'horrid' we are:
WTF? Are the people of England so ignorant of how Brexit has made them appear? The UK isn't seen as welcoming to outsiders. It is not seen as progressive. It is seen as isolationist and unstable at the minute. Which it is.

A better solution to our NHS problems would be to Remain in the EU, thereby retaining current staff and spend the money and energy currently being spent on Brexit fixing the NHS. Instead the NHS is going to lose experienced people and have to fork out more money on Visas for those who are willing to stay.

Change can be good but it needs planning, brexit should be done over a 5 to 10 year timescale, if at all.

^this. So much this. Planning should have occurred before Art 50 was even triggered, to work out feasible red line, costs, ways to mitigate. That, I could have lived with.

Change can be good but it needs planning, brexit should be done over a 5 to 10 year timescale, if at all.

Agree. Much as I personally don't want any sort of Brexit, it could have been done successfully if taken a gradual step at a time. First, several years as members of the CU and SM while we sought out other trade deals and refocused the domestic economy, looked at solutions for Northern Ireland. Then a gradual disentanglement over several more years.

But no, May drew up her stupid "red lines" which were not compatible with a gradual exit and triggered Article 50 before anyone had a bloody clue what to do next.

I think it's starting to look slightly more likely that we'll end up with a Norway-style Brexit if we have one at all, but then we have to put up with the protests of leavers who thought they were getting rainbows and unicorns. They will be angry, but I bet they won't turn their anger on Farage, Johnson, Fox etc who made the lies and false promises.

Had Theresa or whoever been at least a bit sensible rather than triggering A50 she should have made an HONEST calculation about how much money ad time Brexiting is likely to cost, and put it against the possible advantages of leaving, THEN have a second vote/referendum.
I would put a very small amount of money on the fact that civil servants WILL have done this rough calculation, but Theresa has suppressed it because it would show that with even moderate projections staying in would be best. on the basis that NEW money hasn't been put into the NHS or any regeneration plans and thus far EVERYTHING is negative she has deliberately hidden the projections.
There are departments that work this sort of planning out, the information exists.

I agree with you Dippy
{But no, May drew up her stupid "red lines" which were not compatible with a gradual exit and triggered Article 50 before anyone had a bloody clue what to do next. }
The graduated plan is the WA, it is already written.
The 'Red lines' are effectively a suicide pact, bound to end badly but I have no idea how the HoL and HoC who are supposedly intelligent people are going along with it.

Whilst I would love to lay the blame squarely at TM's door, didn't rather a lot of MP's vote ( a large majority) to give her the ability to trigger Art 50 ? Now a similar sizeable majority have voted against the WA. 68 days to go. Not exactly filled with confidence that the 'supposedly intelligent ' members of Parliament have the time or consensus to end this well.

I do wonder sometimes if no deal is TM's plan, as a way of finishing off the Eurosceptic elements of her party for ever, let the UK feel the full force of no deal fake news/project fear in all its glory, with the added bonus that anyone who is liable to make a fortune from such a scenario does, then bounce the UK back into the EU.

My personal preferred option would be revoke, and it is still an option

Of course if or when the no deal scenario happens, the media and the Government have set up the most brilliant of scapegoats, 'The will of the people' .