> The most relevant constraint is always available resources which is dominated by human capital and experience.
Which is why it's particularly puzzling that JavaScript community ignores vast swaths of human capital and experience. Global state? Awesome! Principle of least astonishment? For the birds. Caring about security of your dependencies? What on earth for?
> Productivity is measured using useful output, not code quality.
Useful output is strongly correlated with code quality, and that correlation grows stronger as a project grows.
> The part that puts food on the table.
Sure, my billable rate is the same no matter what language I'm writing and if that's all you care about, okay I guess. But I've rewritten a server-side JavaScript application in Python, and my clients wouldn't hesitate to say that they got more for my billable hours than they did for the team of three JavaScript developers who wrote the original application.
> I can't name a single language I have any experience with that has One True Way™ of binding to events except for C and assembly which can only pass callable pointers around.
You need to take a bigger step back to understand what I'm saying. It's not about having One True Way, it's about keeping your code simple enough that you can read it when you come back to it a year later, you can break it into composable chunks, and reuse it. Every one of the ways on the page I linked forces you to think about an event loop in a process that's fundamentally procedural. It's fundamentally the wrong abstraction for the situation, but JavaScript literally can't represent a better abstraction.