"The way I see it seems to be....
Vote 'stay' if the economy is more important to you.
Vote 'Leave' if immigration is of more importance."
Both very narrow reasons, and poor advice in total if you don't mind me saying.
Immigration effects the economy and the economy affects immigration.
If there were a single reason for deciding which way to vote then ever closer union is the most pressing.
There is no status quo it should be pointed out, though I find it rather depressing to see the remain camp try to claim the status quo. This is downright dishonest and has no basis in fact.
By treaty obligation we are committed to Ever Closer Union and this will continue apace in the event of a remain vote and likely accelerate.
We therefore stand at a T junction with no road straight ahead. We either turn towards the EU with it's ambitions for a superstate and EU army, or away to shape our own destiny with the rest of the world.
Immigration will likely continue with a leave vote, though we could be far more selective in who we seek. Personally I think this is a poor 'single issue'.
The economy too would likely continue. :)
Frankly the doom and gloom perpetrated by remain has little basis. The figures being bandied about such as £9 billion per year compare to our public spending budget of close to £700 billion. The inconvenience of even the worst case scenario to the 6% of businesses which actually export to the EU are mere tarifs, though as they export more to us this would be a net gain to the exchequer.
I think the leave camp should be a little more honest in the effects upon business, there would be some inconvenience to industries, particularly those who have grown large by dint of the EU handing them advantages against their smaller rivals. Nothing profound though, small gradual change as the forces affecting the workforce, fiscal regime and potentially tarifs subtly change the landscape. Business doesn't like uncertainly or rapid change so other than political statements I really can't see anything drastic happening even in the worst case.
In the long term however the results would more be towards re balancing the UK's economy towards it's traditional model. The great trading cities such as Glasgow, Bristol and Liverpool would be renewed as the influence and power of London and the South East waned. Frankly many of the more strident claims made by remain only ring even arguably true if you put, "If you are living in London and well off" in front of them - as all our politicians are.
We either fill in the gaps in the EU's single market with all the horsetrading and shenanigans that entails or set our sails to eventually tap the far larger and hungrier markets worldwide. The two are incompatible as the EU's customs union operates much akin to a car boot sale where you trade freely with your neighbours but disadvantage yourself through tarifs with the rest of the world.
We have little influence or power within the EU as evidenced by our inability to shape a common security and defence policy. This is our strongest suit as a nation within Europe yet we have clearly been unable to influence them or show leadership, the president of the EU would not be calling for the creation of an EU army otherwise.
Ever closer union has real dangers, brexit real opportunities which I think would be particularly favourable for our youngsters.