Do the terms asset stripping or corporate raider mean anything anymore?

In the 70's and 80's lots of todays big names made a fortune buying controlling shares of companies that had spent decades reducing their overheads buy buying (instead of leasing) their corp offices, factory machines, etc until the value of the real assets were greater than the stock value. Then all the assets were sold off, and leased back, with shorterm sweetheart deals that lasted just long enough for the raider to sell the resulting company to someone else (or simply in some cases shut it down).

Wall street has long sense stopped serving anyone but themselves. Its long past due for many of their activities to be made illegal.

Tech service companies have to rely on reputation for renewals and referrals. Focusing on quarterly profits makes managers take short-cuts that burn bridges. It might work in a commodity business where the outputs are standardized or easy to grade, but short-cutting reputations is shooting your own foot.

That's not capitalism, it's our culture around capitalism. There is nothing inherent to capitalism that stresses short term growth vs. long term growth. For example much of the push for short term growth comes from the stock market, but the stock market (or public ownership at all) is in no way required for capitalism to work (and IMO it would probably be better without it).