What, exactly, is wrong with asset stripping?

We’re told that Morrisons being taken over by private equity would be a very bad idea. This could be true and might not be, it’s not something we have an opinion upon, whether collective or individual. It’s the specific objection that The Observer has which puzzles us:

The profit motive above all else is another. It encourages asset stripping,

Err, yes?

We live in a universe of scarce resources. It’s also true that not all human needs are entirely met and the desires that are as yet unsated stretch off into the far distance. We thus desire to be economic with our use of resources in the achievement of any one task. This then freeing those assets to be used to at least attempt to sate some other need or desire.

If some organisation - and it is any organisation, whether public or private, capitalist or socialist, market or non-market - has more of those scarce resources than is necessary to meet the task it performs then we’re not just interested in, we positively lust after, those assets being stripped from it and tasked with meeting some other need or desire.

The profit motive is the incentive to so strip, move, those assets. Given that this is the process by which society as a whole becomes richer why is it an objection?

What, exactly, is wrong with asset stripping?