OK, sure, but people are pitching Python not just as a language to write scripts but also one to do development of large projects on large teams, and I think this property makes it somewhat ill suited for that.
The question is more about "what kind of problem do you want to have and what price are you willing to pay to solve them ?". After that, choose the tech that matches this wish.
For me the iteration speed, the ease of adding new members and the flexibility are key.
But what I discovered is that most people just code bad Python and say they have problems, just like most people write bad C/java/whatever and blame the language.
You are supposed to writte Python in a certain way, like any language, to scale.
Nowaday, ruby is dying in his RoR and Japan niches so the question is moot.
For small, local needs to pass around data, a plain dict or tuple usually suffices. If you need stricter contracts, you define good classes and interfaces.
There's a need for discipline in your coding style, but I've frankly not found this to be an issue with moderately competent coders who understand this. Yes, you can shoot yourself in the foot with this, but if anything those bugs are usually obvious and solved in the first pass of testing.
Yeah, but they're often solved after the code goes into production and doesn't work, rather than before the code is ever committed.