I feel like you're not getting the point of the article -- I agree with you that Kahney's confusion at Jobs' icon status is unfounded, but he was using it as context around his larger point about Jobs' lack of public philanthropy.

I agree with the article in its criticism of Jobs -- I don't think it's a private matter that people are amassing fortunes so far beyond their means; there is far too much need out there for the super-rich (be they professional athletes, movie stars, producers, or captains of industry) to continue the concentration of wealth. If he's engaging in these issues anonymously, then great. If not... Well, I have issues with Paris Hilton, too.