There are two justifications that I see being offered:
1. Some topics developed by pure math have later been applied to the sciences.
2. Not everything has to be useful.
Of these I would say that (2) is more honest. I think a study should be under taken with respect to (1), since as pure math has flourished in recent times I think (1) is less true than in the past. Never mind anecdotal reports, we need to count how much of the total mathematical content generated in the 19th century is in use today.
As for (2), I often use this line for students and I am tempted to agree with it in general, especially when presented with something like the video in this thread. But getting students to study math is one thing, and paying professionals to dedicate their efforts to it is another. Personally, I don't think (2) is sufficient justification for a lifetime career in pure mathematics. Look at all the scientific efforts that could help the world e.g. better solar panels, recycling methods, fusion power, agriculture, birth control, communications networking, medicine, transportation, etc.