> People seem to choose their languages more on the type system than more fundamental aspects of their language

The type system constraints *are* the most fundamental issue and the majority of the focus of any programming language designer.

On another note I would even add that this:

> Adding a type system to an existing dynamic language is a great exercise in showing all of the different ways type systems restrict the expressive power of programming languages.

Is a pro, not a con as the author makes it sound.

Most people want simple stupid predictable and readable code they need to change to pay their bills.

If people want expressiveness they can install their lisps or other languages full of macros and extensions.

Languages that unsurprisingly have never scaled despite how many fans they have: every single author reinvents the wheel, writes its own DSLs, reinvents their own patterns.

Haskell is also plagued by this, by allowing compiler extensions jumping from project to project is a pain, reading code in textual form is a pain, you consistently need compiler or runtime support.