Run 2 of the LHC ended in 2018. Currently the experimentalists are busy analyzing that data, and the theoreticians are busy improving the theoretical prediction precision to the level of the experiment. If we had no new data, it would take a decade for this work to be finished.
Run 3 of the LHC is scheduled for 2021-2023. After that the High Luminosity LHC upgrade will take place, with data taking currently scheduled for 2026-2038 [1].
Overall, just with the LHC-related projects in the foreseeable future we are looking at decades worth of measurement and research. There's no reason to worry about the lack of work to do :)
[1] https://project-hl-lhc-industry.web.cern.ch/content/project-...
I have overtly stated as much, in as public a way as I had access to at the time. I don't care if it's "not incredibly expensive per scientist" -it is a wasted effort, and an awful lot of what gets published (with 1000 "authors") as being bullshit. I've also seen the lifestyle and read the "results" of both experimental high energy and the theorists: it's basically a cargo cult at this point, imitating the glory days in the 50s and 60s.
Let me ask you a question: what lack of result would convince you that high energy as practiced today is a waste of time? I look at stuff like this and see sheer decadence:
https://kirstenhacker.wordpress.com/2019/09/29/the-walrus-an...
The "muh basic research" argument doesn't work forever. "Which basic research" is a question we should be asking, and building yet another giant accelerator and detector set up is not necessarily the answer, just because that's been useful in the (now distant) past. Phil Anderson is probably right.