Well yes, there’s some ambiguity in terms here. I think it’s reasonably obvious that economic efficiency isn’t a top priority for the people building the Burj Dubai, and that they’re knowingly paying for prestige and such and not just square footage. What I took Lumpy to mean was that if you’re looking for a return on investment, then 1200-1300 feet is about the limit at the current time. Beyond that and you’re paying just for the height and not any increased utility from the building. (Whether that’s correct or not I haven’t any idea.)
Yep they can build some pretty impressiv stuff with labor at slave wages. I think it would be hard to prove that was never the case with any other building however.
Slave wages? I’d be shocked to find out that the labour for the Burj Dubai wasn’t being paid at the going rate in Dubai - which means it has to be enough to lure foreigners in to the country. What’s paying for the thing is the high profit margin on crude oil.
There is no point in building a structure that does not have access to the top floor.
The 100,000 kilometer high space elevator has to be you limiting factor. 
Well, I guess US$4.00 per day for laborers, and US$7.60 per day for carpenters isn’t quite slave labour by the strictest definition. :eek: