Rising prices:
1. There will be a tariff on most imported goods (WTO terms remember). For cars it is, I believe, 10%. These tariffs will be reflected in the prices so cars will become 10% more expensive;
2. Most produce needs to be imported. Besides the tariffs there will be huge lines for customs, delaying produce to come to the end consumer. This result in more produce going bad so less good produce end op in stores. All costs have to be recouped over less, this results in higher prices;
3. The exchange rate of the Pound Sterling is already falling due to the uncertainty. Falling rate of pond sterling will result in higher prices for imported goods.
Of course the government can decide not to put tariffs on goods imported from the EU. The issue then is that all other countries can demand a similar treatment from the UK government. So also goods imported from US, China etc needs to have no tariffs as well. I don't think that is the intention as the UK.
The government can also decide to use the proceeds of the tariffs to lower taxes. However, there will be massive unemployment. Car manufacturers like Honda, Toyota who have assembly plants in the UK or plants from Airbus or Rolls Royce; they do not want there products suddenly be more expensive in the EU. Rolls Royce for instance makes aircraft engines for Airbus. Besides, they also import semi-finished goods from the EU, which is now als subjected to import tariffs. So that is a double whammy. They will shut dow their plants and move to mainland Europe. The Government will need the proceeds for tariffs to pay for all those former workers who need government assistance.
Really, it is not so hard to see what will happen and is already happening. And my question really is why? What is so bad about the EU? What can you do better in future compared to what you have now? Why do you want to risk war in Northern Ireland? why do you want the risk of Scotland and Northeren Ireland to leave th UK so that they can join the EU.
Spoiled fresh food goods at Calais leading to a statistically significant and sustained increase in UK consumer price inflation? You may want to rethink that argument. As for tariffs, the UK wants a free trade deal and is already 100% aligned in regulatory standards. If one isn’t signed it’s because it’s politically expedient for European leaders not to agree one. So be it, there are other trading partners. Car tariffs: I am personally excited at the prospect of tariff free Tesla Model 3s rather than tariff free German cheat-mobiles.
Your exchange rate point is also conjecture based upon a simplified reading of the economic theory and is unsupported by the data. The UK’s CPI inflation rate of 2.1% is almost exactly at the target rate of 2.0%. This is despite GBP/USD trading 15% below its level of 18mths ago (the approximate period for inflation transmission effects to take effect) and more than 20% below the pre referendum level. More is the pity given how indebted the UK remains.
Meanwhile UK asset prices (particularly housing) remain at a highly inflated level, largely thanks to global QE and bad planning law but unhelped by the free capital regime (and to a lesser extent free people movement) required by EU membership. Combine this with stagnant real wages for everyone below the top quintile (despite sustained full employment), as a result of decades of manufacturing jobs in the supply chain being offshored to Europe, and more recently the marginal cost of domestic labour being bid down by EU to UK immigration.
And there are your economic ingredients for Brexit. The political ingredients should not be hard to understand, it’s merely a matter of perspective.
To quote the perfectly reasonable opinion of ex Chancellor Ken Clarke: “I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe”.
Fair enough Ken. But this is an extremely fringe view in the UK: island nation, centuries long period of parliamentary democracy with no cultural memory of occupation/fascist/communist government, common rather than Napoleonic legal system, linguistic and historical cultural bias to Anglosphere/Commonwealth.
As for unemployment, since 2010 the UK has been an engine of private sector jobs creation, with 3 million more created than destroyed over the period. One million of these jobs were created since the referendum! Of the first 2 million, many of these went to nationals of fringe EU countries that suffered hardest under the ECB’s insane policies. So the UK helped to temporarily diffuse the societal time bomb of the Euro but at the cost of stagnant real wages for its own population. You’re most welcome.
Looking forwards, I do not dispute that major changes to an economic and political system such a Brexit will cause disruption to employment at a micro level. But I believe in the long run, Brexit will be a success from both a real wages AND jobs creation perspective.
Northern Ireland is a whole separate debate. Needless to say I disagree with your assessment and would point you to the cordial bilateral progress being made on the border issue under Taoiseach Kenny. And then how his successor Varadkar allowed the issue to be weaponised as a multilateral bargaining chip, with a solution being imposed that is almost certainly legally incompatible with the Good Friday Agreement but which has until now played well with the republican vote in the south.
You don’t need to take it as an insult that the UK wants to cut its own path in the world and that a majority of its population believes power best resides where it as as localised, transparent and accountable as possible. Every society is the product of its own story and there are perfectly sound reasons why others may prefer to group into a larger union. You can now get on with it and fully federalise the EU before the Euro blows up the whole project.