Why do I criticize the tone and not the argument? Because there isn't much argument there. (Note well: I did not say that there isn't much in the argument to criticize. You haven't given much of an argument - just a smug assumption of superiority, and that's all. I criticize the tone because that's all that's there.)

If you want to persuade people, give them a reason to believe what you say. "Believe me because I'm smart and you're stupid" is not a persuasive argument.

If you don't want to persuade people, if you just want to wallow in your superiority in your self-imposed ghetto, that's your business. But if so, would you mind not wasting our time with your statements of superiority?

And: Non-lispers are cheaper than lispers? Perhaps the average lisper is better paid than the average non-lisper. Did you control for years of experience and such? And if for 90% of the business you don't need people who know lisp, then maybe lisp isn't the best tool for the job except in 10% of the cases. Maybe you should stop thinking it's best for everybody?

Look, I don't want to persuade anybody. If you are interested in why I am so smug just give Lisp a try, if that same smugness puts you off, no problem, nobody minds. I am smug because people rather dare to criticize me that way.

Not cheaper in terms of salary. Cheaper in time needed to train. You can use e.g. Python or Ruby without knowing how its implemented (if you knew you wouldn't use it). A Lisp programmer automatically needs to be a full stack developer, or at least conscious about the stack, because he is operating a compiler framework. It has lots to do with circular definition and choosing the right tools bottom up. For instance, most of CL can be and is implemented using a core part of the language. What that core is can differ from implementation to implementation. So the barrier between user and creator is very small in Lisp, thats what makes it so powerful and demands its users to be well trained in many aspects of software systems.

I think the more knowledge you have of your environment, the better you can solve a problem in it. So I think most programming problems can be better solved in a lisp than in any other language (so far).

If I knew how Python or Ruby was implemented, I wouldn't use it? BS. I'd use it if, weaknesses and all, it was good enough to be useful for what I was trying to do. Anything else is posturing.