I don't think it really 'misses' this point, so much as it elects not to touch on this. I think the point is that the effectfulness of a value is captured in it

I don't think it really 'misses' this point, so much as it elects not to touch on this. I think the point is that the effectfulness of a value is captured in its type, but if you're trying to explain this to someone that isn't familiar with haskell, it would be somewhat more confusing than saying what was said.