The winners and losers of platform capitalism. Why is it controversial? Written by Thanasis Ntatsis.
In the past two decades, our economy has undergone a radical transformation. At the heart of this shift is a new economic model known as platform capitalism. This model, characterized by the rise of digital platforms that serve as intermediaries in various markets, has redefined how businesses operate, create value, and generate profit. But while platform capitalism has brought about innovation and convenience, it also raises concerns about economic inequality, particularly regarding how it disproportionately affects the middle and lower classes.
But how exactly does platform capitalism work?
Platform capitalism refers to an economic model where digital platforms such as Amazon, Uber, Airbnb, Facebook, and Google dominate the market by facilitating interactions between different user groups. These platforms act as intermediaries that connect buyers and sellers, service providers and customers, or content creators and consumers. Unlike traditional businesses that produce goods or offer services directly (B2C, B2B), platforms generate revenue primarily through fees, commissions, data monetization, and targeted advertising.
This model leverages network effects, where the value of the platform increases as more people use it, leading to monopolistic tendencies. For example, Amazon’s vast customer base attracts more sellers, creating a cycle that increases its market dominance primarily in the west. Similarly, platforms like Uber benefit from a large pool of drivers and riders, making it difficult for new competitors to enter the market. That doesn’t mean however that competition doesn’t exist, for example companies such as Lyft and AliExpress act as direct competitors to Uber and Amazon leveraging their own geographic advantage.
While platform capitalism has revolutionized industries and created new opportunities, it has also intensified economic disparities, particularly affecting the middle and lower classes in several ways:
- Temporary Employment and Gig Work
One of the most significant impacts of platform capitalism on the middle and lower classes is the rise of gig work. Platforms like Uber, Lyft, TaskRabbit, and DoorDash have redefined employment, turning traditional jobs into freelance, on-demand work. While these platforms provide flexible work opportunities, they often come at the cost of job security, stable income, and benefits.
Gig workers are typically classified as independent contractors, which means they do not receive health insurance, retirement plans, or paid leave. This lack of worker protections places a disproportionate burden on the middle and lower classes, who may rely on gig work as their primary or supplementary source of income. The instability and unpredictability of gig work make it challenging for these workers to plan for the future, save for retirement, or invest in education and training.
- Erosion of Job Quality and Income
Platform capitalism has also contributed to the erosion of job quality, particularly in middle-class professions. For instance, platforms like Upwork and Fiverr have transformed professional services such as graphic design, writing, and consulting into a global marketplace where workers compete for projects. This increased competition often drives down wages, leading to a “race to the bottom” where workers are forced to accept lower pay and less favorable conditions.
Moreover, automation and algorithmic management employed by platforms can lead to job displacement in industries traditionally populated by the middle class, such as retail, journalism, and customer service. As these jobs become automated or outsourced to gig workers, middle-class employees may find themselves facing de-skilling or downward mobility, with limited options for comparable employment.
- Economic Insecurity and Consumer Debt
The convenience and accessibility of platform-based services have encouraged a culture of consumption that can exacerbate economic insecurity among the middle and lower classes. Platforms like Amazon and eBay make it easy for consumers to purchase goods at the click of a button, often leading to increased spending and, in many cases, accumulating debt. Families may find themselves trapped in a cycle of consumption driven by targeted advertising and data-driven marketing strategies, which platforms use to maximize their profits.
Furthermore, the rise of digital payment platforms and buy-now-pay-later services like Affirm can lead to financial strain and increased debt among lower-income consumers. While these services offer flexibility, they also make it easier for consumers to spend beyond their means, leading to long-term financial difficulties.
Now a case can be made about the fact that it is not the platform’s fault for this consumer reaction, truth is despite the targeted advertising and marketing, everyone has the freedom to make financial decisions as they choose.
Do platforms purposefully make it easy for customers to spend beyond their means? Yes. But is it necessary? Probably not.
The Upper Class: A Different Experience
In contrast to the middle and lower classes, the upper class has largely benefited from platform capitalism. Wealthy individuals and investors are often in positions to capitalize on the growth of digital platforms, either by investing directly in these companies or by owning shares in technology-focused investment funds. As platform companies grow and their stock prices increase, the upper class sees significant financial gains.
Additionally, the upper class can use platforms to enhance their economic position in ways that the middle and lower classes cannot. For example, affluent individuals can invest in short-term rental properties and list them on platforms like Airbnb, generating passive income. This new movement of Airbnb investment properties has raised concern about the effect it will have on the price of real estate. In cities such as New York the platform has been banned because most landlords stopped leasing properties and started listing them on Airbnb for increased profit. As the real estate market shrunk, rental prices skyrocketed due to increased demand reaching an average of 5000$ a month in neighborhoods such as Manhattan.
Similarly, they can afford to outsource tasks and services via said platforms, saving time and further consolidating their economic advantages.
While the upper class enjoys the conveniences and financial opportunities provided by platforms, they are generally protected from the negative consequences faced by lower-income groups. The flexibility, security, and economic opportunities that platforms offer to the upper class starkly contrast with the precariousness and insecurity experienced by gig workers and middle-class employees.
Platform capitalism has reshaped the global economy, offering new possibilities for innovation and growth. However, it has also intensified economic inequality, disproportionately impacting the middle and lower classes. By promoting precarious work, driving down wages, and encouraging unsustainable consumption, platform capitalism has undermined the financial stability and upward mobility traditionally associated with the middle class. To address these challenges, it is crucial to develop new regulatory frameworks and policies that protect workers’ rights, ensure fair wages, and promote transparency in platform operations. By doing so, we can create a more equitable digital economy that benefits everyone.
Author: Θανάσης Ντάτσης
Οι απόψεις που αναφέρονται στο κείμενο είναι προσωπικές του αρθρογράφου και δεν εκφράζουν απαραίτητα τις θέσεις του What Politics Means και της συντακτικής ομάδας.
Απαγορεύεται η αναδημοσίευση του άρθρου από άλλες ιστοσελίδες χωρίς άδεια του What Politics Means. Επιτρέπεται η αναδημοσίευση των δύο έως τριών πρώτων παραγράφων με την προσθήκη ενεργού link για την ανάγνωση της συνέχειας στο What Politics Means. Οι παραβάτες θα αντιμετωπίσουν νομικά μέτρα.