A good Reasoner at the store would know if they and others stopped buying it the store would stop stocking it

1. You are assuming those people don’t want to eat meat. It seems like you’re assigning them an ethical or moral value (that you possess?) that would affect their reasoning whether the meat was present or not.

2. Meat in the US is highly subsidized and culturally relevant. Without a massive coordinated effort a boycott would not help. Unlikely in a country like the US given its size and difficulty coordinating across such a large area.

3. You’re forgetting how absolutely wasteful most American grocery chains are. They’d throw away or mark down 100s of pounds of meat before they’d stop stocking it at all.

Reduction in meat consumption should come through removal of subsidies, restricting where and how much land can be used for growing feed crops and, arguably most important, reducing to a point of elimination the amount of intensive factory farming of animals.