At first glance, it may seem like the retort is correct. But upon further consideration, it is clear that the retort misses the point of the original essay. While it is true that buying products from countries with low per-capita gross domestic product may not always be the most effective way to help those countries, it still goes a long way in terms of raising awareness and showing support for their cause.
Additionally, the essay does not ignore the environmental impact of purchasing these products. In fact, it suggests that people look for ways to purchase the products responsibly, such as by selecting products that are sustainably produced with minimal environmental impact. Therefore, the criticism of the essay's stance on environmental concerns is unfounded.
Finally, while alternative methods of assistance such as donating to charities or getting involved with the local economy may be more effective in helping countries with low GDPs, they also require more effort and money than simply buying their products. For those who are unable or unwilling to invest more resources, purchasing goods from these countries remains an easy and meaningful way to support them.
In conclusion, while alternative methods of assistance may be preferable when helping countries with low GDPs, buying their products still has value and meaning. Therefore, the criticism of the original essay's premise and conclusion are unwarranted. That being said, enjoy your espresso - UrRong if you don't!