Let's stipulate that any form of the "if you don't like skyscrapers, move to the country" argument should be abandoned by all sides in the debate.
Granted that, however, most of us know full well that the urban "reach for the sky" impetus is an ancient one, going back to whatever reality lies behind the Tower of Babel story in the Book of Genesis. The equivalent of skyscrapers do lie at the center of old European cities like Paris... in the cathedrals. I leave to the reader any aesthetic comparison of structures built to the glory of God on the one hand and greed on the other. What can be said, however, is that the skyward reach of Notre Dame or the Duomo of Florence, approached much more closely to the technological limits of the day than any skyscraper in present day Toronto. (Madrid is a bit of a special case since Toledo was the primary see of Spain, The cathedral of Madrid is only a 19th century construction.) What is expressed in the towers of European structures is also found in ziggurats, minarets, domes and pagodas of other cultures. People do long for height.
That remains the case today. I imagine that few people visit "www.lowrisegeek.com!" The real question, most of us would probably agree, is managing the desire for height properly.
A first question is "what kind of city should Toronto be like?" I don't know Madrid but love Paris. Still, I don't think a North American city can actually resemble the city of light. Among other things, no one here would put up with the ruthless demolition of the old that made Paris the city it is today. Go seek medieval Paris and see what you can find! (Hint: visit La Musee de Cluny... a wonderful place to see.) I think many of our arteries, eg Eglinton Ave East, should be Europeanized, but that still won't create another Paris. I think Toronto needs to compare itself, like to like, primarily to other North American cities.
I know that I would hate to see Toronto continue to sprawl into another Los Angeles, swallowing the rich farmland that brought the city into existence, with strip malls and subdivisions on the fringes of, say, Richmond Hill. I think Toronto could most resemble another Lakeside city, namely Chicago, famed for its architecture, including supertall towers. (Though, for sure, I don't want to see anything like the south side of that city!) Increased density caused by towers downtown and Europeanizing some major arteries, would counteract the destructive tendency to urban sprawl.
One does not have to enthuse over every proposal of get rich quick developers to believe that the increased intensification of both the core and its northern extension along Bay and Yonge to the Yorkdale area is a good and humane development. Permitting towers, which even at 30-40 storeys alter the streetscape greatly, but artificially limiting their height to something markedly less than presently exists, seems to me utterly foolish. So, city planners and developers, play close attention to the way the towers meet the street, but also how they look up high. Let them grow high and, I hope magnificent.
I wonder if this one will actually get built, late in the present boom as it may well be. But, if it does get built, provided it is carefully designed, count me as a fan.
