I think the talk of economics concerning the EU, for or against, is something that needs proper debate instead of all the preaching which has been rightly pointed out. However, not all voters are economists and great numbers of the anti-Euro electorate are not all focused on the economics of the EU matter. The reality is the uncontrolled, or seen to be mass immigrations of people to the UK. I honestly think many voting people can't see past the immigration worry to be focused on what the economic future may hold. I think there may be great numbers of people that will vote on the migration issue without paying too much attention to the debate on financial trade gaps. Many people think the economics of EU, for or against, is politicians arguing within a smoke screen hiding debate on migrations of people to Britain. 

This might sound ignorant, but even ignorant people can vote. They think economic arguments are steering away from the issue they worry about. There are more of these people that vote and if this is not seen to be dealt with properly, it will not matter what the economics are until it is too late. Pro-EU believers can't sell the economic advantages to these voting people - most of the electorate don't care and are happy to believe anti-EU economic advantages because it suits their purpose to do so. 

I don't think a renegotiated deal with Europe is going to get sold to the UK electorate either - even if it was good - which it will not be. This is because the issue of immigration dominates most voter's concerns - not all but most. The only commentators I've heard voicing this angle of anger are in the Irish media. They seem more in touch with grass roots Brits than our own political classes who want to stay in the EU but are too frightened to stop mass uncontrolled immigration. 

If this free movement of people with EU are club rules that will not be changed; I think the argument may already be lost and the economics can do what ever it wants.