The truth "Autonomous, re-runnable, code-based tests are objectivity good" has created a perceived truth, namely "Testable design is good design". This assumption is incorrect.

The phrase "testable design" is dependent of two things; the design of the code under test AND the tools used for testing the code. This is a problem when the major tools today in the Java world tells you to not test private methods, final classes
and so on.

Yes, there is a big overlap between testable design and good design, but should the test tools you use govern your design? Conscious and good design choices should govern the structure of your code, and testability should come with that.

PowerMock changes the phrase "Testable design is always good" to what it should be, and that is "Good design is always testable".

And when it comes to the hurt of legacy code, would you rather re-factor the code in order to write tests, or write tests to be able to re-factor the code safely?