That liberal sociology professor was an awful debator. The counter argument is that the boycott isn't looking to reduce lettuce consumption long term. It is to put the farmer, who has a commodity with a long production cycle and a very short sale period, in a position where he either has to take a smaller profit by paying more or a complete loss from being unable to sell lettuce. Not saying it's correct or moral, but she could have done more than stomp off like an angry child.
True, but he still would be in a better position to pay the wage increase in the absence of a boycott, with a “run” on lettuce.