I won't go into everything cause it would take way too much time, but I have to point one thing out:
> Optional typing dramatically increases execution speed, something that is very relevant and important in 2018.
As compared to what? I'm guessing your assumption was that I was thinking about purely dynamic languages? Not really, I was thinking about using static languages with type inference.
If you agree, then what is your point? That we should not use a powerful language because it is not popular? Or that features in popular languages are the only features worth having?
If you disagree, can you elaborate what exactly about Lisp metaprogramming do you not find powerful? That would make your arguments more concrete. Otherwise you are just going around in circles stating the same opinion over and over again which is really only your opinion that many of us don't seem to agree with.
Sure, you're sacrificing homoiconity and macros, but you get strong static typing and purity etc.