It is rapacious and immoral, for sure. But it's also dumb, in that a) it ignores the whole reason society created the idea of businesses in the first place, and b) its inherent short-termism makes it ineffective at accomplishing its stated goal.

The reason we invented commerce and later corporations is that we can create more value for each other than we can create for ourselves on our own. Systemically, businesses exist to create more value for their customers than the business extracts in cash. Profit is a side-effect of serving customers, not the purpose. In practice, almost anybody hauling out the "increase shareholder value" line is justifying some sort of short-term thinking that increases cash returns at the expense of long-term assets like loyal customers and happy, highly-trained workers.

It's a dumb idea. And don't take it from me; the article has many famous capitalists saying so. Further searches will lead to many others saying why, including many business school professors.

Some counter examples of hugely successful (not dumb) and completely immoral enterprises:

* The conquistador and later Portuguese ans Spanish empires "strip mining" the Americas

* Both East India companies (Dutch and British) "strip mining" India and south east Asia

* The slave trade and various industries it enabled (e.g. cotton and sugar)

* Colonial financial interests of the US in the Americas

Closer to our times checkout the "Friedman Doctrine": "There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages in open and free competition without deception or fraud."

As to the "many famous capitalists" you mentioned, it doesn't really matter what they say but rather what the businesses they manage do.

I'm not saying being evil is always obviously dumb. I'm saying the "increase shareholder value" meme is dumb.