Agreed
"Norway is out of the EU, Iceland is out, Switzerland is out; yet all of them have trade, all have free movement, all contribute to the ERASMUS program to allow your kids to study in other countries. Considering Britan was the EU's second largest economy, and fifth globally, even Junker isn't idiotic enough to try to cut Britain off like that, unless he wants EU exports to drop by 90billion EUR overnight."

I can't disagree with this. And I'm pretty sure Britain will end up with a deal that puts them in such a position: access to single market, Erasmus, etc. but which requires UK to allow free movement, and possibly asks UK to pay for the privilege, and requires UK to implement at least trade laws. All of this without a say in how the EU is run, or how those laws are put together. That might be the best outcome for the country, but is it really what Leave campaigners wanted, and is it really an improvement on the position when in the EU?

And while I'm back here, what message does it send to the world right now to say "Sod you, we're leaving"? The message is clearly that UK wants to reduce cooperation with international partners. Of course it will maintain diplomatic relations with all countries, but the message is clear, and Putin, Kim Jong Un, Trump, Marine Le Pen, et al. must be rejoicing in an international community which is fracturing, allowing space for the strong-armed extremist to push in.
(Smale is stuffed, Wed 29 Jun 2016, 9:12, Reply)