The low-cost or low-cost economy is expanding strongly, although it is difficult to determine its size. It's not easy to measure what's often just a lectern or a commercial lure. However, the loss of purchasing power of a large part of the population after the economic crisis has led to the low cost strategy for most economic sectors.

The argument of the advocates is that after the crisis there has been a considerable loss of purchasing power and many people cannot maintain the level of consumption. In this context, there are companies that are willing to offer products or services at an appropriate price. Therefore, taking into account the customer, these companies have to adjust their production costs. From the outset, this market-oriented strategy has a strong competitive argument. Moreover, some voices state that they are socially responsible companies, as they facilitate the access to goods and services to the people most affected by the crisis. Well, this perspective is a trap and the background situation shows something else.

To begin with, this type of economy was not born with the 2008 crisis. At the end of the last century, some companies began to use this procedure to reduce costs. It is therefore not a customer-oriented business strategy, but takes into account the internal costs of companies. The objective of lowering these costs is key, particularly if wages are reduced and labour costs are reduced. The air sector or the textile industry is widely used and its main objective has been the reduction of working conditions. As a result, labour conflicts have multiplied and work in these sectors has deteriorated further. This competitive pricing strategy is also established in the digital economy and is based on the work system of false self-employed. In this way, the costs of social security are avoided and they are allowed access to very significant financial benefits.

In the problems experienced by small shops in towns and neighborhoods, the introduction of low cost chains as a franchise is a huge responsibility. Shops that cannot withstand low prices are in the process of extinction and the low price that initially benefits the customer can be exhausted in the long term as oligopolies are strengthened.

Furthermore, the deterioration of working conditions and vertical relationships of low cost companies with suppliers and poor working conditions jeopardise the quality of their products or services. And this reality directly blurs the view of those who say that these kinds of companies are looking for a benefit for the customer.

Thus, it can be said that the low cost economy generates significant social and environmental costs. Price competition is based on the reduction of labour costs to the detriment of the wage level and the deterioration of workers’ conditions. Cost reductions could also come from innovation, but this requires strong investments and these types of companies are looking for rapid short-term returns.

Furthermore, behind the low prices lies pollution and environmental degradation (e.g. air and leisure services) or the relocation of production in the textile industry. In other words, the low-cost strategy involves a large number of negative social and environmental externalities that have a significant economic cost. All of these negative effects are paid by society through taxes. Therefore, if we add these costs to the prices of cheap products or services, we would be aware of the fraud of low cost.