Short term pain for long term gain?
Poorer members of our society who are in lower skilled jobs seeing higher wages as a result in the change to the amount of labour that can be supplied
Or are you only considering the situation of those who far fairly comfortably well off, and only how they are and will be affected by Brexit?
There are always going to be winners and losers with whatever the outcome was, and had we stayed, the losers would (a pretty strong case can be made in support for it) have been the poorer in our society who have seen the wage suppression in lower skilled jobs (and therefore are those most likely to have supported Brexit)
Those still arguing against it, (Brexit) claiming it to be a disaster are clearly not from that pool of low skilled labour this country has, whose views and voices they chose to ignore for a very long time before the referendum, seeing as the things they were saying didn't directly affect themselves so they didn't try to empathise, but were instead extremely dismissive, denouncing their views as racist, etc rather than spending any time trying to understand their side of things, how they were being affected and taking action to help them rather than just arrogantly mocking them
But the issue with this is that will we see wage increases which are not at least matched by inflation? The way society has worked for ages is that if the wages of the low skilled increase then everyone higher up the skill scale would expect their wages to increase too. This is why there is such a debate about correct level of minimum wage and living wage etc. Will people who are in skilled jobs just above the cost of living wage accept people with low skills earning just about as much as them or will they in turn demand higher wages to keep the differential? I would suggest it will be the latter. This will cause more inflation. This is why so many tories were against the minimum wage. I am not a modeller to calculate all of this impact but it is highly likely to happen.
The point which makes your point slightly tricky to square is that area with lowest levels of immigration from EU were more likely to vote leave - places like Hartlepool. Were their wages being suppressed by immigrants in London? Obviously a few outliers with places like Boston but there was a negative correlation between EU migration and brexit voting. With this being the case it means that there is no reason to think that the wages of those in areas with few immigrants will see wages increase when immigrants leave other areas. The issue is that during the brexit debate immigrants were classed as a group without making the distinction between eu and non Eu migrants. This was a calculation by leave because it was obviously a vote winner.
So now we have a government who poorer brexit voters feel they have to support but are making the cut to UC and hiking NI (which is a tax rise hitting the poor relatively more than increasing income tax). My hunch is that the decision to remove 20 quid from someone’s weekly income is made by people who could do that easily so can’t compute that for some people that is a crucial amount of money. Time will tell if this is the straw that breaks the camel’s back. Did you see the tape the other week of gove saying about how the tories can play politics with the poor and utilise their vote?