There are existing infrastructures like SLAC which keep being upgraded in part with private funding, they are not entirely out of the race.

Pierre

Ahhh, but you are speaking of the ILC, a superconducting juggernaut of some 50km which can still only reach the puny collision energy of 0.5TeV. Why go for such a thing when the much more attractive possibility of CLIC exist? A delicious 3TeV of electron-positron collisions at ultra high luminocity. No troublesome and gradient limiting superconductive cavities either. With 100MV/m we are far above the theoretical limitations of the enemy competition. First beam? Around 2023, optimistically.

(Me? Biased? Naaahhh...)

Any negatively charged particle will do. You can even use an anti-proton. Lifetimes may be rather short, however.
Exotic atoms cast light on fundamental questions - CERN Courier

The Paul Scherrer Institut in Villigen has investigated pionic hydrogen (π^--p) and deuterium (π^--d), and DAFNE in Frascati has investigated their kaonic counterparts. Other no-less-important species include kaonic and antiprotonic helium, which have been studied at the Japanese High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK) and CERN, and yet another exotic variety is formed by the non-baryonic π⁺- π^-(pionium) and πK atoms. Finally, the antihydrogen atom, pbar-e⁺, which CERN has copiously produced, is in a class of its own owing to its importance for testing the CPT theorem to extremely high precision.

I suppose Pauli exclusion is irrelevant since we're talking about Hydrogen. But, in addition, having light bosons filling the orbitals would mean that Pauli exclusion doesn't contribute an "exchange energy" to the interaction between various hydrogen atoms, and so you get the benefit not only of smaller atomic radius but also of the ability of the atoms to actually overlap significantly.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

I don't think so. I'm an experimentalist, but its really about the exact Higgs mass, which should be a free parameter in the standard model, otherwise we could stop searching in a range, and it is used by about every theorist who wants to endorse Susy, so it should be a real effect.

Just as an update for you what are the actual issue, why else we believe standard model (SM) is incomplete.

Dark matter exists:

I've seen the picture already elsewhere, but it is from here. This are two galaxies flying through each other. The reddish part are Xrays caused by interaction of the galactic gas. The blue is, where the mass of the galaxies is, detected by gravitational lensing. So it is clear, that most mass in the galaxies is not interacting hadronically or electromagnetic.
In principle this matter has to interact only through gravitation and weak interaction is optional, but as weak interacting particles would have decoupled in the BigBang at pretty much the point that would explain todays dark matter, there is hope, that we can find it in colliders and that it is e.g. the lightest super symmetric particle, which is stable, when assuming supersymmetry to be conserved.

Another thing which the SM has problems to explain are neutrino masses, and why they are so small, though they have mass. (Cosmological structure formation indicates, that dark matter is non-relativistic, so much heavier than neutrinos, which don't contribute a lot). We think they have mass, because oscillation from one flavour into another is detected. Several experiments try to find out more about the mass and the (CKM-like) mixing matrix.

It is not clear by which mechanism the SM would create an excess of matter over antimatter in the Universe as it is seen. There are ideas for such processes and even in the SM one can explain some assymmetry, but only about 10^(-5) of the observed effect. More CP violating phases are needed. Colliders, maybe more the lower energy B fabrics (Japan plans a new one) may help to find it.

Fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) and mesurements of the speed of galxies very far away indicate that most of the mass in the universe is dark energy

Dark energy has a negative pressure (which I personally find mind-boggling) and increases the speed of expansion of the universe. It is not clear if this is just a cosmological constant as once introduced by Einstein to make his formulas consistent with a static universe, or if it is a dynamical thing. One hopes to find out more with better obersertion of the CMBR. It could be, that an extremely prices measurement could find a shifting coppling constant alpha, if it is a dynamical thing.

Der Amerikaner ist die Orchidee unter den Menschen
Volker Pispers