-snip-
Now FIFA has their own rules. They care more about money and not about the rules. There is a documenty about FIFA that there is so much money involved in all that
If FIFA is more concerned with money, why didn't FIFA choose Saudi Arabia as the host of the World Cup because Saudi Arabia itself has sufficient accommodation and finances to be able to make the World Cup the best after Qatar.
You are giving unreasonable assumptions buddy.
I know FIFA has its own rules and nobody can change them but this is all to increase the love and prominence of the sport of football in every country so it can't be said just for money.
Back then several factors came up for consideration. One of the arguments that favored Qatar was that the middle-east has never hosted the FIFA World Cup before. FIFA is quite interested in expansion of the sport outside Europe and Latin America, and after the 2002 edition (which was hosted by Japan and South Korea), they used the 2022 edition as a stepping stone to one of the unexplored regions. I would still like the FIFA to give an opportunity to either China or India to host one of the editions of the World Cup. These two nations comprise one-third of the global population, and they are yet to host this tournament.
China and India are densely populated countries and don't really prioritize the sport of football so if you want to host one of them as the host of the World Cup you have to prepare well in advance so that there are improvements and efforts made so that spectators and players from various countries feel comfortable when compete and lived there for some time.
I don't know whether this option is a good one or not, but I think that with more and more countries that have never hosted the World Cup becoming World Cup hosts, the love for football in these countries will also increase.
However, considering that China and India are densely populated countries and have insufficient football facilities, maybe FIFA will consider all of them if you want to choose one of them.