As indeed did a small majority of your fellow UK citizens. Impossible to argue anything to the contrary.
I understand your sentiments - but to an outsider (like me) it has to be, it was one hell of a leap of faith to leap into the unknown to take though.
Can I ask you a genuine question Colin ?
Where and when do you see the payback..or perhaps less quantitatively if you prefer... what would be the signs that would confirm for you personally, that it was the right call ?
At the risk of putting words in Colin's mouth, and if I misrepresent you here Colin do say and I will retract it, he isn't looking for a payback as such. I think, from what he has said on here, many times, that it is a philosophy based on the following:
1. The EU is held back by various lame ducks that do not "pay their way" and are net takers.
2. The UK is a net contributor (was) and was having to prop up the lame ducks.
3. The lame ducks will eventually cause the EU to collapse because the net contributors will be sunk by the lame ducks. Titanic references, etc.
4. We are therefore better off because whatever happens we are only having to look after ourselves, and this is a better route than supporting the lame ducks who will only take down the rest of the ship. Titanic, liferaft, etc.
In this I think it is an analogous philosophy to those who oppose socialised healthcare in the USA. They don't want to have to pay for the poor, they want to look after themselves and even if they are bankrupt in the process this is a price worth paying because at least they have looked after themselves. The same philosophy applies to right wing libertarian views on social care, care for the elderly etc. Even if I give up my house, it's my house and I'm only paying for myself.
This is a reasonable enough philosophy and I can understand it even if I don't agree.
Colin goes on to support this view with some shopkeeper economics along the lines of "Annual income £100, annual expenditure £101, result penury and misery. Annual income £50, annual expenditure £49, result happiness." He then attempts to apply this philosophy to the economics of a nation trading across the world, which unsurprisingly doesn't work. At this point his views and mine differ diametrically.
In terms of what Colin would regard as justification for his view, what he would regard as success criteria, and again my apologies Colin if I misunderstand you, we have achieved our success. We have left, we are now masters of our own destiny. Whatever happens, it's our destiny and we only have to worry about ourselves. I'd liken it to a man leaving an unhappy marriage; even if he ends up in a poky flat in a grubby bit of town and getting the bus to work because he can't afford a car any more, he's still better off because he doesn't have to carry her useless fat arse round all day. Of course, she is so useless that her place is going to rack and ruin as soon as he leaves, so he's better off getting out early before the collapse, and he can build his own place without her.