Joking aside. I have heard that some physicists want to build an even bigger HC, but not without opposition from other physicists, like Sabrina Hossenfelder
There are arguments in favour of the next machines and arguments against them. At the end of the day, it is always a matter of costs versus benefits. Depending on who you are, what you work on, etc., then the opinion may be different. I personally think that benefits are larger than the costs.
I didn't check the video you shared (no time for this), especially after having read the abstract:
I explain why accelerating particles and colliding them is a good way to study the structure of elementary matter. However, particle colliders are also very expensive, and it is not presently clear what benefit we would have from building another one. Instead, there are other experimental avenues that we can pursue which would bring more benefits for lower cost.
That's a non-argument. it is not because you won't fund project A that projects B+C+D+E will be funded. An existing case is when the SSC project was cancelled in the US. The money was spread elsewhere by the American congress, especially in non-science corners.
In any case, this is a serious business. You guys literally help us understand the universe better.
Yep. That's the argument number 1 in favour of any project: understanding the underlying mechanics of the universe :)