This isn't so much a "take" as a "regurgitation" of the most hackneyed PL-fight slur against Go, that it's a language for managers and not for programmers. Of course, large numbers of programmers who work in Go by choice for personal projects argue against that. But the argument thrives because there's a kernel of truth to it, in that if you wanted to pick a programming language based purely on expressive shininess, you'd write in OCaml.

What makes the argument superficial is that the list of things PL-connoisseur languages have that mainstream languages lack is long, and can be used to exclude almost all programs; the argument proves far too much, and isn't really saying anything. The fact is, it's not managers making people pick Go and Python; the assertion is false.

There are real arguments you can bear against Go. This just isn't one of them.