I am not saying that a taller tower makes a place like OKC suddenly better than Boston. FAR from it, and anybody who inferred that should try jumping to more reasonable conclusions.
What I AM saying is that it seems that so many of these inferior cities have been having beautiful, amazing developments that they can be proud of from the 21st century. Ignoring our obvious dominance over these cities from street level, when you zoom out a bit it seems like many of them are changing for the better (and taller, why are so many people here against taller?) while we have been pretty stagnant on the "looks" front. I am tired of hearing ad nauseaum that "Boston is a better city" and thus "new large development is unnecessary".
If that is so true, how come a city like London has either built or is building 17 of it's 19 tallest buildings since 2000, and all 19 since 1980? Don't they have a dense, historic city that some could argue is MUCH more dense, historic, and important than Boston? Are they foolish for wanting to grow their city and skyline, and embrace the future of their city in the 21st century?
You all sound like NIMBY's. If you don't want to experience growth, go move to the rust belt somewhere... just not Cincinnati, because they just built their new tallest.