I may be mistaken, but I believe in Japan the standard is "build to remain habitable." as a result, skyscraper building techniques there are very different to the US.

“The Japanese Building Code (BSLJ) explicitly requires that buildings withstand moderate earthquakes with almost no damage, while collapse prevention and life-safety is required for severe earthquakes. It is expected that a typical building will be subjected to several moderate earthquakes during their service life, while the likelihood of occurrence of a severe earthquake during the same period is rare.”

(Comparison of the Seismic Code Provisions of the National Building Code of Canada and the Building Standard Law of Japan, https://www.caee.ca/12CCEEpdf/192-oZfU-119.pdf)

A similar approach is used in California and other places under the name Performance-Based Design.

> It's just not economically viable

Is that code for "it costs too much"?

That’s literally what it says. It’s not code for anything

It’s interesting to see what some people consider to be big complicated words.

Yes, it costs too much to build it to last, it costs very little to rebuild it...