"The question was never whether this would involve costs"
Brexit was sold as being positive for the economy. The proponents drove a bus around saying they would get 350 million back. It was largely advertised as a net positive for the economy
Brexit was sold as being positive for the economy. The proponents drove a bus around saying they would get 350 million back. It was largely advertised as a net positive for the economy
One argument against Scottish independence vote just 2 (!) years prior was that Scotland would lose membership in the EU. And they really like this one it seems, with 62% voting to remain.
But since they're only 8% of the population and apparently don't count, they instead got Brexited against their will. Similar with Northern Ireland and, I suppose, Good Friday agreement.
Wales voted to leave, for some reason. Maybe they hoped one of the weekly hospital builds would happen there.
Or what are you trying to argue here? You expected tax pounds to have colours, that there was some separate bank account labelled "EU funds"?
>Britain's national debt is growing at a faster pace than any country in the world except Botswana,
The national debt is certainly very bad, but that's because the country elected a very left wing government. It's not related to Brexit.
Immigration was definitely a factor, but there were a lot of people —despite strong expert opposition— saying it would be an economic golden age. Being able to trade with everyone on our own terms. Being free our exporters of red tape while maintaining our existing trade and supply routes.
Of course this was wrong. 49% of the country was screaming it was wrong. But there were enough people swayed on moderate promises that things could be better.
Of course the argument was made re: EU contributions staying "home" to be allocated domestically, but the economy was always shrugged away as a "necessary unknown to take back control"
Sure, you could argue that they didn't mean it would be positive for the economy to save that money, but "we will save 350M/week" is what's on the buses and their website. Even if we assume the average voter clicks through here and reads everything point by point, or goes onto the website in the first place rather than by the headline, it is at the very least heavily implied... Otherwise what is the argument?
Other replies are hilarious, focusing on "muh! The BUS!!!". I don't care about the bus, I'm focusing on the broader point. "The economy" was never at the forefront of the arguments put forward by Leave.
“Probably”. Wow. Talk about self delusion and historical revisionism. You can’t bring yourself to admit the obvious reality that the Brexiteers were - to a man - self-serving, mendacious, con artists.
This is a lie. Provably so. Exhibit the other post replying to you.
But this is not unexpected, the entire brexit campaign was one lie after another, and the supporters lied about it continually too.
For much hilarity, read this. I still laugh each time: