As others have mentioned, Docker doesn't really do any magic which might harm the smooth running of a database, but just leverages process isolation built into the Linux kernel and provides a convenient way to package and distribute bundles of software. In the case of a database, the former can be handy any time you want to run a database on a host where you want to run other software too. As for the latter, being able to run the same configuration locally as on production servers, to replicate configuration over many nodes in a cluster, to distil both configuration and software into atomic units are as advantageous for databases as for any other software.
At my company we have been using PostgreSQL on Docker for over two years without and have been sufficiently satisfied with the results that we're in the process of turning out setup into a product in its own right: http://containable.co/
Or the revenue could implode. Companies making money selling stuff people want face competition from other companies making better stuff. Companies relying on advertising as their main source of income compete with every other company selling advertising space. For example, Old Media isn't hemorrhaging money just because someone's selling better newspapers.
I think you take for granted some features commonly provided by modern web frameworks addressing what used to make web development difficult. For example, in the pre-Rails era, building just a simple CRUD website used to be difficult.
For arguments sake, if we say there are 20 "real-life issues" then all web frameworks tend to address up to 12. New frameworks are created to address some of the issues of the past frameworks but with regressions in other areas.
Recently, I've been using Lift which happens to be very strong on most of the points you named, yet in retrospect, I don't feel it made web development easier overall because it has other deficiencies.