What I think Go has done for me, is crystalize a belief I was already leaning towards, which is that a language being productive or fun is a lot less important than standards cutting through the issues that don't matter.
Not arguing about the best way to format code, or which test library to use, or how to share memory across threads is what makes Go valuable. It is implied that the language has to be this bad to achieve that, which is the open question to me.
Using Haskell for similar stuff is more tedious, even if a actual coding is more fun. I can see (and sometimes feel myself) the cognitive dissonance here.
C is decades old. Haskell was designed to help you write correct programs, rather than simplicity of use or productivity (or that's how I'd characterise it).
If you compared Go to C# or Java 8 or Scala, it'd probably look a lot worse. Deployment isn't so difficult that Go has any advantage in my experience: install a JVM on the server, ensure your build system is producing a fat jar, run it. Done.
With Capsule you can even make self-executable JARs that have a little shell script attached. Then you can run the program like any other UNIX app. chmod +x and ./execute it. Fully self contained, and can even update itself automatically.
I don't think the same could be said for say, Scala or F# which offer many of the same paradigms but in a more flexible way though.