>Cheap and disposable yes, then just build another.

They've built entire cities just for investment purposes that few if any people live in. Then there's the buildings they started building that were never finished and then demolished.

It is a humongous waste of resources and a blot on the landscape to have all that housing just standing there, without maintenance or upkeep, just falling apart.

This is not a smart way to build things. Their buildings do collapse. It's easy to say 'build another one', but you know: there were people in those buildings when the collapsed. Is that not something to worry about? That the standards are so lax and are ignored with impunity that you're going to live in a building that is going to collapse at some point and you may, or may not be in that building at the time?