I agree with most of what you said. But just a thought... anyone can land a single or a double, but only a handful of people can rotate and fall on a quad <-- which I believe is the logic behind giving a fall on a quad more points. To answer Mathman earlier about why scores are better than ordinals. Remember that the sport is more than just the elite skaters (although it is a big and arguably the most important part). Imagine yourself as a judge at an intermediate level competition. There are 30 girls all with similar technical patterns, can do all the doubles, similar spin quality etc. Sure you are going to have some who are clearly better and some clearly not at the same level, but the mast majority of them are indistinguishable. As you slowly judge this competition, you realize that it is becoming impossible to accurately place the skaters... and that is the beauty of the system from a judges perspective. Judges no longer need to rank skaters, no longer need to juggle between difficulty of program vs X number of falls. Judges are just required to look at each element and give a GOE based on their interpretation of the jump according to book. The computers and predetermined point totals takes over the rest.
I think we can all agree that the current system does not punish falls enough, and that there are many things that need to be changed. I believe that we do sometimes care a bit too much about the scores, and it is important keep in mind that the point system is put into place so we can award points to skaters more consistently (and hopefully rank them properly!). In 2 or 3 years, we don't (or at least I don't) remember the point totals of the skates. However, I do remember the final rankings of the competition, and ultimately, it is the rankings that are truly important.