IME a lot of Haskell advocates spend this windfall in a way that's poorly aligned to business requirements: we spend it all on increasing the code quality (and perhaps even overshoot, taking more time than users of another language to produce code of the same scope). But that's not an inevitability. (I would speculate that it tends to happen because most people in the software industry claim to value quality a lot more than they actually do, and a lot of Haskell programmers take them at their word).
One of them is VC funded. We have the stakeholders. We have the pressure to deliver.
Haskell is making this easier, not harder. We can maintain pace as the software grows because the language is generally well-principled, and the compiler keeps us in check rather than us having to rely on human discipline.
Haskell sounds amazing. I would be thrilled to learn it, and I hope the ecosystem flourishes. I hope there will eventually be millions of jobs to write code in the language. I'm a little bit envious of those who speak fluently about monads and set theory, and I've learned a lot from brushing shoulders with those people.
Meanwhile, I'll continue solving real-world, extremely stateful problems in an as-purely-functional-as-I-deem-convenient manner with the tools I already have under my belt. You can pry my precious semicolons from my cold, dead, carpal-tunnelled hands.