[p1esk]

A lot of marketing efforts in various forms are designed to subtly persuade you that owning a car is cool, that driving it is a pleasant experience, that it signals respect and social status. Even people who don’t need cars are influenced by that. Same techniques are used in real estate advertising.

Keep in mind that marketing also influences other people, including those whose opinions you value.

If PR/advertising/marketing became illegal tomorrow, people would still continue to spend most of their income on a place to live, food to eat, utilities, a car and their kids education.

Yes, and the commercial entities providing those services would have devised ways to influence you despite all those restrictions. Unless you’re talking about North Korea style society, where marketing is replaced by propaganda.

[westiseast]

I guess I’m saying, marketers aren’t persuading me I need a car. I made a fairly practical choice that I needed a car (maybe I’m not typical?).

But perhaps instead of buying the cheap Japanese one, I bought the expensive German one. So marketers persuaded me to spend 20% more?

The idea that marketers are somehow controlling people’s lives assumes that without marketers, we’d all be living some kind of radically different lives. I doubt we would.

[petra]

Without marketing, people buy a Toyota that's reliable for 20 years, instead of 4 German cars.

Of course fuel-efficiency complicated matters a bit, but in an efficient economy, engines may be replace.

[p1esk]

marketers persuaded me to spend 20% more

Exactly. There are basic needs and there are desires. I’m talking about the latter. Note that to afford that extra 20% you might need to modify your life in some way.