That doesn't really make sense, because people "better than you" won't want to work for you. I certainly wouldn't work for someone who I thought had strictly inferior skills.
It makes more sense to frame it as "hire people who can do something that you can't". You should be able to do things that they can't as well -- otherwise you're not bringing anyting to the table.
In other words, this is someone who is equally talented but brings a different perspective or skill set. It takes a lot of different people and skills to make anything.
Not necessarily true. People better than you might want to be a part of the company and the problems you are solving more than they care whether their "boss" is more skilled than them.
Also, depending on the role, it might be different skillsets. Perhaps you are a better manager, but they are a better coder. That's often a good fit.
However it does run the risk of hiring ambitious people who expect to grow, and if they feel you prevent them from doing so, and they bring more to the table, it might turn the relationship sour.
It makes more sense to frame it as "hire people who can do something that you can't". You should be able to do things that they can't as well -- otherwise you're not bringing anyting to the table.
In other words, this is someone who is equally talented but brings a different perspective or skill set. It takes a lot of different people and skills to make anything.