Have you asked each and every person to come to your conclusion? I voted "leave" because I don't want unelected officials like Junker deciding the law of the land in a UK.
Perhaps you should get more informed and read up on the Kalergi Plan.
Perhaps you should get more informed and read up on the Kalergi Plan.
Your point about "unelected officials" betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how the EU works. "The EU" or its officials don't decide that much, if anything at all. Most of it relates to being able to exchange goods and services in a fair and safe manner. And even then, these decisions are driven by the elected governments of the member countries, because the "unelected officials" are selected and directed by those.
For example: if a company from country A is providing a service in Country B, using workers from country A, then there need to be certain rules. Labor protections should apply equally, as should professional qualifications and such. Similar things apply to goods traded between countries. If one country lowers its standards, for example for medical equipment, and the other members are forced to accept that equipment, then there is both a safety concern and a competitive concern. That's why so much regulation is coordinated at the EU level - and driven by the member states.
And no, bilateral treaties can't keep up the slack, because 28 member countries would have to have bilateral treaties with each other, which would be impractical.
You really shouldn't have voted leave my friend.
Unless a voter spends a ridiculous amount of time studying and keeping current in politics, he can only meaningfully participate in a limited number of elections and issues. "Down the ballot", even for things like AGs or Judges, much less regulatory officials, people lose interest and competency.