I think the language of the post was rather hyperbolic; I have quoted this line a few times now:

> But this level of wealth concentration and inequality is detrimental to the fabric of a society. We’re not better off, we’re not more innovative, we’re not healthier or more cohesive or happier when this happens.

When you give Airbnb as an example, I fixated on them mostly because it doesn't jive with the rest of your point.

So Airbnb is part of a group of companies in one geographic area that happen to be successful. Why does it matter? Should we choose to not do business with them, for the sake of geographical monetary equity? Whether group fiat or government breaking them up, it is the same result.

Sorry if all of this came off as too aggressive. It is monday, and I have had too much coffee already :/

Really don't get where you're coming from, that quote is two paragraphs after the mention of many other companies, where he's clearly implying the concentration of wealth in the hands of the founders and investors is the detriment.