I think your original assertion is a bit much. I wish I was better at coding, but at this point in my life it is more valuable for me to sit with my clients and build relationships. I think that even if I was a very capable programmer, I would still not code and rather go out and talk to my clients or potential clients, because that is something my programming team cannot do. The more I interact with my clients, the more I learn about problems and issues they have that can be fixed with technology.
It's also about finding the right product-market fit, knowing how to market, knowing how to sell. How about founders who can't market are like painters who can't paint?
I feel like this must be what happens to artists - when they get a vision for an artwork, they must feel compelled to create it.
If the founder with the vision does not have the skills to create their vision then they must pay others to do so.
So I think the comparison extremely apt.
There are a lot more artists who are technically skilled that don't have a creative bone in their body. You might as well pay them to create your work so you can leverage your best talent -- your ideas.
In fact, I'd contend that as a society we've agreed that the creative act is supreme to the mechanical act. Architects, directors, large scale-sculpture artists. Their works are created by other people, they merely provide instructions for other people to execute.