Every major economy runs particle colliders, which consume huge amount of resources, billions € (not including the cost of education and time of highly qualified personell). There are many articles writing about "new physics", but as far as I searched, in the last 50 years they produced nothing to generate any noticeable profit.
State budgets include something like science support, but there are many scientific projects that would bring real profit, i.e. the Skylon project receiving tens of millions €, some 1% of the colliders'.
From the economic perspective, how would you explain the existence of particle colliders?
Edit Just found a video that explains corruption mechanism in case of fusion power to get funding The interesting part starts at 5:51 - albeit the economic warnings were defined in advance by STOLA, later they were ignored by officials: are there economic reasons for this?
Maybe it is similar effect like publish or perish scientific paradigm, forcing scientists to publish an article even when they know that the data produces nothing useful - just because they want to get funded?
I'd like to know if similar antipatterns apply to CERN and other particle colliders and if not what is the actual business model and if corruption is inherent part of it or not.