Erm surely ability is important as well. Programming is no different in this regard to pro sports - some people have more talent (which probably in turn breaks down into innate attributes, determination and learning opportunity earlier in life).

Ability comes from practice, there really are no shortcuts.

Most of the difference seem to be in motivation.

Some people really don't get programming while others do.

When I studied at university many years ago, my course had a reputation for being tough. Before the course started properly, there was a three week intensive Java course with an exam at the end. They suggested that if you didn't pass the exam, then it probably wasn't the subject for you. A couple of people failed that exam and continued with the rest of the year long course anyway. Those people did struggle and I don't think any of them passed.

Are you arguing that all tools are equal? Or that some tools are better than others but the difference is negligible compared to experience? I don’t agree that experience is everything (if by everything you mean that all other factors have zero influence).

Without experience, tools don't matter. A skilled developer will most likely write better code regardless of language/framework.

It's a repeating pattern in this society, fools with advanced gear doing what fools do best.

I'd argue that no matter how "good" you are, you are capped at what tools you're using.

Consider using a hammer against a pneumatic tool. A newbie will hose you with better tools, they're wielding that condensed knowledge at their hands, their sum overshadow yours with only a hammer.

To a degree. Python has plenty of advanced features that I have rarely used. 20% of the language gets used 80% of the time.