How does that process “raise prices”?
Give me a break.
That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard and it is directly contradicted by both history and practical experience.
Dumping is about the only conclusively documented economic model there is.
It is not even restricted to international trade.
Back in the days of Monopolies and Robber Barons it was SOP for huge economic players with unlimited assets to dump their products on the market at prices below the cost of manufacturing in order to drive the competition out of business to create a working monopoly and then increase the price of that product to as high as the market would bear as a sole supplier
We are seeing this play out across the board with Chinese products and it can be argued that China's entire currency manipulation strategy to keep its currency exchange rates massively undervalued is the monetary policy analog to dumping.
We also have recently seen Saudi Arabia try to kill the US domestic fracking industry with oil price manipulation . The Saudis failed in the attempt, but they were able to drive a number of fracking companies into bankruptcy and then acquire the assets at fire sale prices
The economic misnomer “dumping” confuses the issue by implying a unilateral act that is somehow forced on the other party.
But we know that isn’t how the market works. No seller takes a dump truck, backs it up to a warehouse with no demand for his payload, and “dumps” it. That is stupid. Market transactions require bilateral voluntary agreements between buyers and sellers.
Here, if there was no demand in America for goods from China, then no one would pay to have them shipped and sold here. The DEMAND in America for goods from China drives the SUPPLY. It is a bilateral agreement. That is not what the misnomer “dumping” implies.
>> Back in the days of Monopolies and Robber Barons it was SOP for huge economic players with unlimited assets to dump their products on the market at prices below the cost of manufacturing in order to drive the competition out of business to create a working monopoly and then increase the price of that product to as high as the market would bear as a sole supplier <<
You appear to be taking obsolete economic history lessons from Ida Tarbell and the assorted leftwing journalists and academics who followed in her footsteps.
But in fact, starting back in the 1950’s, careful economic research by Aaron Director and his acolytes like John Magee at the University of Chicago Law School showed that the once-widely-accepted model of “predatory pricing” — as supposedly practiced by Standard Oil and other “robber baron” companies — was supported neither by logical analysis nor by hard evidence. Moreover, the findings of those scholars and their students still stand. They have never been refuted by careful research.
So you may bash “monopolies and robber barons” to your heart’s content. But you won’t find any support among free-market thinkers like Milton Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams and similar leading lights of the pro-market, pro-capitalist and pro-liberty persuasion