I am not convinced that "no-deal" would ultimately be that bad for Britain. I am very surprised and disappointed that nobody (on either side) has made an attempt at a reasoned economic argument for or against no-deal. All we get is platitudes, hyperbolae, and bravado sound bites that have absolutely no substance.
Europe is likely heading for a recession and even the German economy is slowing. Economically speaking, this may be exactly the time to effect a hard Brexit.
In the event of a no-deal all that would occur would be a series of individual mini-deals or moratoria.
What would be absolute madness would be to capitulate on the current Withdrawal Agreement that binds us to the EU customs union unless and until the EU say we can leave. That is not "leaving" in any sense and would represent the biggest surrender of sovereignty outside of war time.
It is all well and good saying that the EU will negotiate an exit from the Withdrawal Agreement "in good faith", but one has to recall Mr Macron, the French President, reacting to the original Withdrawal Agreement format. He publicly said it was a good agreement because France could hold the UK to ransom over fishing rights, condemning the UK to a perpetual backstop unless their demands were met. Good faith? From his reaction, there was none in evidence then, which would have to make one sceptical for future dialogues.
If someone can post some unequivocal, reasoned argument that is based on facts and figures (not bluster, cliché or soundbite), then I would be interested to read it, whichever position it took on the effects of a no-deal.