I still dont see how much of this has anything to do with dynamic vs. static. You seem to primarily be addressing off topic points which have nothing to do with why do you choose dynamic over static.
What are your reasons for choosing a dynamic language?
And my answer was, to get a productivity boost over C. At the time, there was no strongly-typed language that it was feasible to use that offered as much leverage. Now there is, and one of the reasons for that is the new crop of functional type-inferred languages that "play nicely" with existing estates by deploying as compiled code (native, or .NET, or JVM).
Very few people have the luxury of coding in a vacuum. Language choice is very rarely a purely technical one.
It wasn't my question. My question could be boiled down to... so as you spent most of your time talking about things that have nothing to do with dynamic vs. static, i take it that they aren't really relevant to you. You said no. But you answer still seems to have little do with static vs dynamic but about more concrete comparisons that seem to be, at best, orthogonal to the question at hand.
Ermm, it was, it's right there on the page! I answered in great depth, explaining that "dynamic vs static" (again your words) is in fact a question with many variables.
Perhaps you meant to ask about "weakly vs strongly" typed?
