Why not? If we can get some of them to switch to economics, economists will be too busy working out the math to do much harm to the rest of us.

But other than that, they're just confirming experimentally a 40-year-old phenomenologically motivated model which is computable. After they measure the quantum numbers of the Higgs here's no empirical or theoretical justification for research into extensions of the standard model (other than philosophical prejudice along the lines of "a theory with 18 empirical parameters is ugly"). The lack of evidence of supersymmetry kills string theory stone dead.

Of course, having found the Higgs at lowish energies in the LHC-accessible energy range means after they're done with the higgs they can run the LHC for a decade or so exploring higher energy ranges for evidence of new physics. There is no theoretical justification for expecting any new physics in that energy range. Then comes the Great Desert.

If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa

I see Biology is going to be solved by Physicists.

So nice of them.  

Ever since I learnt about confirmation bias I've started seeing it everywhere