Thank you for coming back to me.
So benefits then:
We will be able to control immigration - eventually, although we'll still need it.
We already could, its just we chose not to. But if we want a free trade deal, it has to include free movement. This has so many benefits to the UK. Also, remember that India is looking to for better immigration rights to the UK when looking at the prospect for future trade deals, so even if you get your wish with the EU, other countries could get other access, leading to similar immigration rates.
That will slow down the pressure on housing and services - although we still need foreign nurses and doctors because we don't train them ourselves.
EU immigration is a net benefit, so we won't feel that benefit. It will mean less tax income to pay for those services, less staff for services (as you say), so we'll be worse off.
We won't pay so much wasted money into the EU coffers that will just get wasted, but whether it goes to the NHS is another matter.
We will end up paying to the EU if we want to trade with them under any deal that won't cripple us. Paying into the EU makes economic sense, which is why just about every study on the subject insists we are better off in the EU. A Norway type deal would be one of the less expensive options, but that would still entail paying in and having Free Movement.
We'll be able to make our own trade deals with other countries, and not restricted by the EUs slow laborious everyone has to be satisfied with the deal drawn before they'll agree tp it style of negotiatons.
Most trade deals take time as they are detailed pieces of work with much to agree on. Here is a key quote by Ngaire Woods (of Oxford University, Dean of the Blavatnik School of Government and Professor of Global Economic Governance) regarding trade negotiations to show why your point is mistaken:
"The essence of trade deals is how much market you have got to offer the other side? So, if Switzerland wants to go and have a trade deal with China, it says, "here’s our market, quite small, your market’s enormous, we need a trade deal with you". And China says, as they’ve done, "fine you can give us completely open entry into your economy, and we will open up for you to trade into ours in 15 years- time" …
"So my point is that for Britain, if everybody in the world believed in a free market as a matter of religious faith, Britain might have a chance, but that’s not how trade negotiations work. Countries say "how big’s your market?" and that’s the deal we’ll do with you. And that’s why Britain as part of a European market of 500m is part of some very successful trade deals with more than 60 other countries. And that’s Britain’s market. Now if Britain wants to try and negotiate those alone there’s two big problems: one it will always be the rule-taker. The big economies will always just dictate the terms. And second, it takes a lot of time, it takes on average 28 months to come up with a trade deal. And the reason that’s important is all these flourishing sectors…they need investment.
"Now when investors decide they want to come to Britain, they want to know two things: they want certainty about what the rules are going to be, and they want a big market share. So, if Britain says "well, we’re not sure what we’re going to have, it’s going to take us a few years to negotiate and we’re not going to have access to the big market", Britain’s got a problem".
http://www.nfda-uk.co.uk/_assets/EU Referendum Report 9 - The Penultimate Chapter.pdf
We will lose out not just because we are a lot smaller than the EU, but we will be less attractive to investors.
We won't have to keep deffering to the ECJ, and get told we can't deport criminals because it'll contravene their human rights; at least we won't if we can get rid of the useless judges we have, and get a better border security team as well.
This is largely ideological (or nationalist, depending on how charitable one wants to be). The ECJ is not a supreme court of Europe, but a way of interpreting European law.
Further discussion here:
https://theconversation.com/the-uk-...-of-justice-heres-what-it-means-for-you-71524
Oh, and we get blue passports back.
I'm sure you know the UK could have had that anyway.
Negative side; we also get Nigel Farage back when he stops being en MEP, but you can't have everything can you.
Shame we can't deport him to the US.
Basically, there is no real benefit