This is really due to software engineering as a cost center. When viewed this way, the business always attempts to drive cost to rock-bottom, which then means

This is really due to software engineering as a cost center. When viewed this way, the business always attempts to drive cost to rock-bottom, which then means software that only incurs technical debt. Because business will never pay to reduce the debt, only to get new features. And yes, this is totally false dichotomy, because eventually that debt means that all those future features are more costly. But something about boiling frogs... The only alternative I've seen without completely rethinking company structure, is having engineering management rebuking business and pushing for these initiatives. Which can be inadvisable from a career perspective, so usually does not happen. It's more politically savvy to push for a "new project" that will fix all the issues of the existent systems.