In terms of the basic algebraic operations -- addition, negation, multiplication, division, and exponentiation -- is there any gain moving from $\Bbb Q$ to $\Bbb R$?
Say we start with $\Bbb N$: $\Bbb N$ is closed under addition and multiplication. But then we decide we'd like a number system that's closed under negation as well, so we construct $\Bbb Z$. Great. But then we decide we'd like to extend this number system further to be closed under division and so we construct $\Bbb Q$. The next step is closure under exponentiation - but when we construct that number system, we don't get $\Bbb R$, we get a subset of $\Bbb C$ which I'll call $\Bbb Q_{\exp}$.
Now clearly when constructing $\Bbb R$ from $\Bbb Q$ we do gain completeness, but our gain is then analytic, not necessarily algebraic. Do we gain any algebraic advantage in constructing $\Bbb R$ from $\Bbb Q$ similar to what we get at each of the other constructions I mentioned?
Algebraically speaking, whatever you gain can be gained on a countable field. Both $\Bbb R$ and $\Bbb C$ are uncountable. To see this, just pick any operation, like exponentiation, and just enlarge $\Bbb Q$ by adding all the complex numbers that you get from the last step. After finishing all the finitely indexed steps, you have a field closed under exponentiation.
So in some sense, they are not the closure of $\Bbb Q$ under any reasonable algebraic operation.
But $\Bbb R$ is one of the fundamental objects of modern mathematics, so we continue to investigate it, and build a lot of mathematics around it. In some parts of mathematics we care more about algebraically closed fields, so we move to $\Bbb C$ instead, which is the closure of $\Bbb R$.
Not everything is about algebraic operations. Analysis, and topology have a lot to do later in mathematics, especially when you try to tame very large objects.