I always say that Types are not there for the truly expert programmer. They are there for the rest of us.
I would say exactly the opposite - beginners pick languages without [much] typing because it is or at least it seems easier to get started. When you step out of toy program territory you will start to appreciate the value of types.
> beginners pick languages without [much] typing because it is or at least it seems easier to get started
It's hard to tell whether the reason beginners pick languages is because they are not typed or because they are immediately practical (such as javascript, php or python). Christopher Allen's and Julie Moronuki's Haskell Programming from First Principles is targeted at complete beginners. Harvard's CS50, which starts with C (well, Scratch, technically; then C), also targets beginners.
You don't see much lisp among beginners, despite the absence of type notation.
> It's hard to tell whether the reason beginners pick languages is because they are not typed
No, it is not hard to tell. Programming beginners positively do not choose languages by evaluating concepts that they have no clue about.
> You don't see much lisp among beginners, despite the absence of type notation.
Lisps are simply not widely promoted to beginners; there aren't enough people to do that.
Beginners end up learning whatever is thrust at them most frequently and loudly. Basically, the non-beginners more or less decide that for the beginners.
I would say exactly the opposite - beginners pick languages without [much] typing because it is or at least it seems easier to get started. When you step out of toy program territory you will start to appreciate the value of types.