I'm not missing anything. I'm well aware of the value of type systems, as I am our current cultural decision to value speed over correctness.
I'm not confident that average level developers are able to ship features in Rust as quickly as they would in Go, which is the root of my point. Those building tools, which generally do not have the same success metrics with respect to speed and correctness, should use the language with a focus on safety and correctness. Those whose positions do not lend themselves to safety and correctness should not use that tool.
> I'm not confident that average level developers are able to ship features in Rust as quickly as they would in Go
Even if this was a genuine concern, they should still use Rust. Because it will be far easier to refactor the code that they ship into something that is safe and correct, compared to rewriting a Go codebase.
But the same shoddy system is also constantly changing the requirements, precisely because nothing is built for posterity and there's tons of make-work churn. Good type systems make code far easier to refactor, and refactoring (as opposed to slapped-on new code) is the only way to handle shifting requirements without being crushed under ones own weight.