Who is arguing in good faith or otherwise? Since both blocs are shit I would say the onus is on 'her majesty's' lot to provide some politics. Miserable failing mediocraties that they are. Lets be honest the country is fucked if we rely on goodwill, friendship. In other words they say, lets extend this or that instead of being left out in the cold, except when a solution is never proposed, being left out in the cold is the result.
There's a complacency, that it will filter down, won't be that bad. The thing is, the only outcome of that that I can see is a 'worse off' economy. Nevertheless a more equal society with the key to their own future. More equal but less well off.
Now I know and understand this is a 'Tory Brexit', that caricature crooks like Rees-Mogg want us to get back in 'our place'. However, if we keep our politics and don't get sucked into their money making schemes we should be alright. By which I mean: a lot of things were better off economically yet somehow your venal Tory always profits. Because the upper middle class doff their bowler hats.
Which leads us to the bollocks idea that we have to go backwards. For whose benefit? BP, Tescos and banking merchants. Sorry, that is simply a case of handing your wages over to pay some unconscionable wanker. In other words the type who will wipe his shoes on your kids face if it puffs him up, puts him against you and makes him feel good.
So equality is very important.