As the title says. Worked with many statically typed languages but its the same thing. You try to do something remotely complex means the fight with the type system/generica starts and you start to duck type (in GO's case interface{} and every language these days have some equivalent to duck type) and then typecast or resort to reflect to inspect the data in run time and by that time the whole experience/readability is just too poor with poor type completion.

Then you resort to generics and the fight with the type system also starts when you want to EXPRESS the non trivial/complex business logic with flexible/reusable functions in the code and most of the effort goes to make the gnerics/compiler to be happy and NOT everything can be expressed and you hit the ceiling and have to resort to duck/typing, reflect magic, type casting with extremely poor type completion. Even if you have a sound code making compiler happy with the generic you wrote is not always possible. Static typing SEVERELY limit you here.

I keep going back to Typescript as I call it "Types made fun to express" and you can not only EXPRESS the very complex part of the code in generics/overload/discriminated union/mapped types/pick/omit etc the code becomes EXTREMELY strongly typed at COMPILE LEVEL (pretty ironic for a dynamic language), much more readable, flexible and most importantly you CAN express your sound code/business logic in Typescript in a way that is just is TOO DIFFICULT in any other statically typed languages that I have tried and worked with.

To me, typescript is THE BEST middle ground between rigid static types (because you CANNOT express everything at compile time and for a LOT of non trivial things you have to fight with the compiler to accept your sound code) and loose/goose dynamic types.