Thankfully there are two different words with very separate meanings that people nonetheless tend to conflate [1]. "Simple" means "not many features", and "easy" means "good to get things done with".
[1] Maybe because we have lots of people speaking English as a second language? In my mother tongue, German, there is no distinction in vocabulary between "simple" and "easy". Both translate as "einfach".
Though if we want to make the clear distinction, like in the Clojure talk below, for the programming domain that’s fine.
I'm not sure about this. What utility is a language with only simple constructs that is hard to use.
Not quite a counterpoint, but a thought in that direction is:
There can be features that make it easy to implement something which some find hard to understand.
I suppose I question the value of simplicity for it's own sake in a language and would rather defer to how simple and understandable the resulting code is.
I frequently consider the added complexity cost of a more complex compiler inherent complexity because I find the simplicity of use dwarfs compiler simplicity or simplicity "just cuz".