I hope you can appreciate my skepticism when I respond to:
FP languages let you manipulate pieces of programming logic as easily as most languages let you manipulate data. As a result, it is easy to create FP programs that morph their shape to match the structure of the problems they solve. Thus the straightforward FP solution is often general enough to scale from the simplest to the most complex problems within a wide spectrum of related problems.
with the simple phrase "you have drank from the FP Koolaide".
Fortran solved everything. Then Pascal solved everything. Then Smalltalk solved everything. Then Prolog solved everything. Now you're saying FP solves everything.
Having been around the block a few times, lemme say that I can certainly see FP being useful as yet another approach to a problem. But your unrelentless praise for the latest new thing should be taken in context of the history of discovering just another interesting programming technique.
FP will be good for some problems, horrible for others. Just like every other style discovered before it. Understand that, and you'll understand why everyone's not jumping on your bandwagon.