In my tech-enthusiast mind I'm really interested in making peoples lives better so something that would instill some wonder in me would be something more like building Parisian boulevards, walkable, tree-line streets, and parks and such. Maybe even a train or bike lane. Something that would actually improve the livability of the city. An out of place skyscraper is just out of place. There's nothing particularly wonderful or interesting about it aside from how ridiculous it is. It reminds me of Dubai. Sadly, I thought we were trying to move past the Walmart-ization of the world.
I've often wondered why a billionaire doesn't found a new city along those lines. There's a lot of very cheap land all around this vast country, and economic value creation isn't tied to geography as much as it used to be.
Heck, you don't even have to start one from scratch. I live in a midsize city away from the expensive coastal areas with a downtown that's full of potential. It wouldn't take a whole lot of money to truly revitalize it.
There are no significant barriers for anyone who is motivated to build.
Personally I'm less interested in Seattle, New York City, San Francisco, Washington DC, Chicago, etc. because the constraints there don't apply to Columbus, Pittsburgh, Grand Rapids, Oklahoma City, etc.
If you'd like to see for yourself, take a look at a satellite map of a city like Columbus and look at the downtown area. You'll find lots of vacant buildings (well you'd have to just know that so that doesn't really count), and surface parking lots that aren't used that often. If you compare that to Seattle you'll see a big difference.
A number of people complain about "billionaires" for being rich and whatnot. My biggest gripe with them is they're often unimaginative and have no taste.
[1] https://fiscal.treasury.gov/public/gifts-to-government.html
I don't want to be monocausal, but a lot of this is simply Europeans spending time on this site and voicing opinions about American architecture.
It's well-understood that Europe doesn't build significant buildings anymore, and there's confusion about why a US city would want to build something large and noteworthy.
That seems a little unfair. For example, Philharmonie de Paris, France; Elbphilharmonie, Hamburg; The Shard, London; MAAT Museum, Lisbon.
How are these related? If people in OKC were polled and 90% of them said they didn't want the building in their community, do you think that would stop the building from being approved? That is not the typical relationship between developers, councils and zoning boards, and community members.