> These kinds of “wacky types” are things you can statically analyze but not really “compile” per se. That’s why it’s a good fit for being transpiled down to a language with no types at all.

> TL;DR, TypeScript is not really a “typed programming language”, it’s a static analysis tool. It’s not really designed to “run”.

I think you have an interesting point but you've come to the wrong conclusion. Assembly language doesn't really have any notion of types (there is some notion of sizes as some instructions operate on, for example, single words and some instructions like SIMD ones operate on multiple words at a time) yet we still consider C, C++, Rust, Pascal, etc to be "typed programming languages". It's really only languages that compile to some kind of VM which have a notion of types at the runtime level and even then, many VMs erase some of those details like the JVM and generics.