That's what I'm arguing, I've said constantly they need more rides and having Rise cost $1bn alone is what's driving them to spend money on optimization and not capacity.
Like, I feel I'm taking crazy pills. We need more rides, we don't get them because WDI costs are too much and they seem to have no interest in reducing them and instead spinning off into planned housing. Built rides, run amusement parks.
If you’ve convinced yourself that Rise of the Resistance alone was 3X its actual cost then yeah, gimme some of those crazy pills.
The notion that we'd be getting more if things cost less doesn't take into account how things actually work. Designing, approving, and executing more projects than the present isn't just a function of hiring more people. The executive review process is a genuine bottleneck and it can't just be delegated or hand-waved away with some flippant comment like "well be more efficient." It's also global, meaning all of the DLP expansions, all of the HK expansions, all of the cruise ships, island acquisition, Shanghai projects, that neighborhood they're building in California, etc. all go through the same pipe as WDW attractions. And that process also has to approve things that no theme park fan cares about, like new laundry facilities, college program housing, the third Springs parking garage, new security setups at each park entrance, back of house facilities, etc. Then there's expertise bottlenecks, such as trying to build five trackless rides at the same time - that was a mistake.
You can only spend money so fast, but the dollar amount is really inconsequential to how fast you can spend when there’s always money for projects that have a return. Also keep in mind that things fail in that process for turning out to be bad ideas, and when they do fail for good reasons (like, say, Wreck It Ralph, second park in HK, etc.) you’re left at square one.