Nobody knows that, because no one can look in the future.
If, for some reason, the EU, say in five years, falls into parts, it might even have been a useful step to get out of it now.
If the exit has the effect of additional pressure on the economy in Ireland and then in Scotland and Wales, and thus on the social climate, it can lead to social unrest, separation movements, and ultimately the disintegration of the United Kingdom.
If the world evolves as it stands now, with a diminishing power of the US and the increasing influence of China, then the British have bet on the wrong horse.Then their influence decreases further because they are too big for the tablecloth, but too small for the napkin in that field of force. The UK is such a bit 10th or 11th power in the world, with associated influence. If you see it purely to GDP, the UK will be in fifth place, after Germany and for France.
Economically it can vary in the short term from disastrous to annoying.In the longer term, a balance will have to be struck between the own interests and those of the trading partners. These are mainly in Europe. Of the United Kingdom exports, approx. 60% goes to other European countries (EU only: approx. 50%, for comparison: US 11%, China 5.6%). Of the import is about 70% from Europe (ca. 55% from EU countries, by comparison: China 9.5%, US 7.5%)
In The history of the world, isolationism is broadly about leading to less and free trade to more economic prosperity.
The advantages for the United Kingdom are enormous.Instead of chaos, we still get a settlement for the most important things. Brexit is and remains of course disastrous, but the damage can at least be limited by making an agreement on how the relationship should now proceed.
However, the benefits for the politicians who should vote in favour are non-existent.A bit similar to the Prisoner’s Dilemma: A deal is better for everyone, but from an individual standpoint, a no-deal is better.
Therefore, it is almost certain that we are heading for a no-deal.
I understand the question, and enter it in the context of 13 March 2019 places, the moment when I reply.
The problem for the United Kingdom is that there is no Brexit deal.
The EU has made a proposal, and the UK Parliament refuses it.The reasons for this are complex, but what certainly plays in the background is that nobody wants to take the political responsibility to be the person who pushes the Brexit with 1 voice over the brink.
That is what Prime Minister May has been looking for, but every time she catches bone.
As long as the content of the deal is not crystal clear, we cannot determine what the pros and cons are.
In addition, there is another point.We are now in a phase that we can call “design”. Hereafter comes a phase that we can call implementation. Only after implementation will the costs and benefits be clear during the realisation phase, in which the intended objectives are achieved or not.
That last phase is a number of years, possibly decades, in the future.And with that it is a pretty uncertain issue.
Because the design is not ready, there is little to say about the pros and cons of Brexit, we are still in the dream phase, where everyone has wild ideas and there is no design yet where we are going to work.
The scholars are not even… But the general expectation is that in the short term it only causes damage, and in the medium term no significant benefits.
Advantage: A polishing of the national Pride, the national pride.For even.
Disadvantage: It does cost a lot of money.For the common man in the UK. Employment down, prices up, tax up, less choice in products (imported from EU are all too expensive soon). Products from the former British Empire are of lesser quality and have a lot more transport costs.