You missed my point, which isn't that skyscrapers shouldn't exist but that they're not viable everywhere, and so saying "skyscrapers are a better use of real es

You missed my point, which isn't that skyscrapers shouldn't exist but that they're not viable everywhere, and so saying "skyscrapers are a better use of real estate than landscrapers" is too simplistic. It's like saying a metro carries more people faster, so they're better than roads. They're better only where the density justifies their construction. Likewise, skyscrapers are better only in some situations. India is also overpopulated, with a population density of 382 people per sq km vs the world average of 51, but that doesn't mean it makes sense to build skyscrapers everywhere in India.