Then we have this:
//...like saying 10 should not be the square root of 100...There are various reasons why it is now clear why the so called "hard" option is a non-starter//
This baseless "non-starter" assertion about real world economies has the certainty of maths, does it?
We leave the EU and its customs union, stop paying the subs, and no longer accept its laws and their adjudication by its court.
There is nothing, repeat nothing[i stopping us doing this.
Which is not the same as saying that we want to lose the advantages of free trade with the EU, that we don't want to co-operate on matters of mutual interest, far less that we want to be on bad terms with our neighbours nd all the other xenophobe, Little Englander crap The only difficulty in our future relationship with the EU is the first bit because free trade within the Union requires full regulatory alignment and the system of punitive external tariffs.
Given the fact that both the UK [i]and[i] the EU will suffer some undesirable economic consequences from a UK withdrawal from the free market it would seem that both parties should be exploring ways to maintain [i]as closely as possible] the current free trade arrangements under the new order, and planning to avoid major disruption to our existing trade.
The fact that the EU (which stands to lose more from Brexit than us) has adopted a stance seemingly based on malice and a desire to humiliate the UK is the strongest evidence yet that Out was the right choice.