Yes, they have lots of money like many other countries but having lots of money can't love lots of problems for the world cup, you just saw in the Qatar world cup they spend lots of money and in the end, many people were unhappy about their hosting services, I think America got enough money to spend even more than Qatar but the thing about America is the country they know how to host a great event even without spending money like Qatar.
"Spending money" doesn't alone guarantee good results. According to reports, Qataris spent somewhere between $250 billion and $300 billion for hosting the FIFA World Cup in 2022. This is almost 10 times when compared to the amount spent by Russia to host the 2018 edition. And I am sure that the cost of costing the 2026 World Cup would also be much smaller when compared to that for Qatar. But then, most of the money spent was used to showoff the wealth rather than to create facilities for the players and fans. In the end, the fans were unhappy about overpriced facilities with low quality.
Your reasoning about economic prowess influencing the hosting of major global happenings like the World Cup holds weight. Still, the crux isn't the expenditure, but the deployment of resources.
Yes, the Qatar World Cup, you pointed out, was a festival of spending, but it fell short of expectations. Spending big doesn't guarantee a memorable experience for players and viewers. It was not just a money issue, but also a logistics challenge. Successful execution of such mega-events calls for meticulous planning and wise investments.
Consider experienced hosts like the United States, who excel in resource management. They prioritize quality of facilities, safety, and services over mere grandeur. Hence, strategic resource utilization, not lavish spending, creates a truly unforgettable event.