正如军队开展宣传招募义务兵、医疗机构发布劝人戒烟的广告一样，政府在市场运营中可以采取高效的行动。除使用广告外，政府往往通过调整纳税条例来改变大众的行为。无论是进行减税还是抵免税款，政府都在对市场进行着调节。当说服性的广告及价格措施失去效用时，政府还可以采取更进一步的措施：进行直接的管理以及采取立法行动。

如今全球经济不景气迫使许多消费者削减开支，增加存款。对于那些社会保障体系尚未健全的国家来说，这种现象更尤为严重。针对这种问题，政府一方面支持银行信贷业务的发展，另一方面则鼓励消费。对于中国市场来说，由于储蓄率较高，因此经济的进一步发展必须以国内消费市场的繁荣为基础。许多城市发放了购物券及优惠券，来刺激短期消费的发展，一些购物券上还明确表明了使用日期。对于生活在农村乡镇的居民来说，购物券会促使他们选购一些耐用品，如电视、汽车等。前不久，杭州市向其他省份的消费者发放了旅游券，以促进外地游客继续前往当地旅游。

在欧洲，政府通过优惠购车项目来鼓励人们进行消费。在德国，车主在交易车龄超过9年的非节能型汽车时，如果愿意购买新的能源经济型轿车时，便会享受到 2500欧元的折扣。这样一来，减少汽车尾气排放的目标便得以实现。目前，德国政府此举吸引了众多车主选购新车，火爆程度远远超出预想。2009年3月，德国新车销量（按年率计算）上涨了40%。到目前为止，新车销量增幅平均达到21%。在欧洲，法国、西班牙以及其他一些国家也采取类似的措施。尽管英国对汽车行业并不十分热心，但政府还是采取措施帮助当地经销商以及零配件生产商。

如今，欧洲政府刺激消费的措施令大洋彼岸的美国颇为心动。美国国会议员已经开始考虑采取类似的措施来刺激汽车消费。但是，有六大问题亟待解决：

1.只对汽车行业采取支持措施是否正确？是否应当考虑该产业在国民生产总值中所占的比例？汽车补贴会不会令其他产业（如家电业）受到冲击？

2.汽车补贴一定会带来销量的增加吗？这种项目是不是鼓励那些还没有汽车的消费者选购自己的第一台车？

3.汽车补贴的范围是不是仅限于小型轿车？还是只针对节能型轿车？那么通用、福特和克莱斯勒所生产的汽车该怎么办？汽车补贴的范围是否会涵盖外国生产的汽车？

4.对于美国的许多州来说，是否会有那么多车龄超过9年的非节能型汽车？在美国的道路上行驶的汽车的车龄基本接近9年，而轻型卡车的平均车龄为6.5年。

5.折扣是否会直接到消费者的手中？还是会出现汽车经销商通过其他价格手段令售价不会发生实质变化？

6.需要新增多少汽车销量才会令纳税人的权益得到保护？高盛集团认为按年率计算应有15%的增幅。

福特汽车公司总裁比尔-福特近日在接受《财富》杂志采访时表示：“我们敦促国会尽快施行这一以市场为基础的刺激措施。消费者、美国经济和自然环境都将成为受益者。”你是否同意他的观点呢？

How Governments Can Boost ConsumptionGovernments are prolific marketers

The armed forces advertise to recruit volunteers. Health agencies advise us to buckle up and quit smoking. In addition to information and persuasion, governments have long used the tax code to nudge us to change our behavior: tax free investments to save for retirement, tax credits on the purchase of energy saving products. When persuasion and price incentives prove insufficient, governments can go one step further than commercial marketers: regulate and legislate compliance.

The current recession has caused many consumers to cut back on consumption and increase savings, especially in countries where social safety nets are underdeveloped. Governments are responding with programs both to increase the availability of bank credit and to promote consumption. Nowhere is this more evident than in China where the savings rate has been 50% and domestic consumption must be stimulated to compensate for the fall in overseas demand for Chinese-made goods. Twenty million Chinese workers have lost their jobs in the past nine months as 100,000 factories have closed.

In conjunction with increased infrastructure spending, provincial and city governments in China have introduced a variety of coupon and voucher programs to stimulate short-term consumption. Some local governments are paying their own employees partly in vouchers that have to be spent within specified time periods. Others are targeting farmers and rural consumers with price-off coupons to boost sales of durable goods such as cars and televisions. Finally, Hangzhou has been issuing books of discount coupons in other provinces to sustain visits to the city's tourist attractions. These coupon books typically offer 20-25% price reductions and are now available to foreign tourists on presentation of a passport.

There are several problems with these programs. First, if the vouchers are redeemable only through certain designated stores and for specified brands, there are obvious risks of abuse as marketers seek to be included on the preferred lists. Second, many programs require the consumer to pay full price at the point-of-sale and to bring paperwork to a government office to secure the rebate. The absence of an immediate price cut at the point-of-sale does not help the cash poor consumer to make a purchase. In addition, the cumbersome redemption process means not all rebates will be claimed and minor government officials may be tempted to extract payments for faster claims processing.

In Europe, governments are promoting consumer spending through car scrappage programs. In Germany, for example, consumers trading in cars nine or more years old (the average age of cars on the road is eight and a half) receive a 2,500 Euro rebate on the purchase of a new fuel-efficient car. The environmental objective of reducing auto emissions justifies the investment. The incentive attracted twice as many buyers as expected. German car sales increased 40% year-on-year in March 2009 following the launch of the program. Since then, the rate of increase has stabilized at 21%. Similar programs have been introduced in France, Spain and other Euopean countries. Although the United Kingdom has been less enthusiastic as 86% of cars sold in Britain are imported, the government is going ahead as an assist to the many local dealers and component manufacturers.

The idea has now crossed the Atlantic and is being considered by United States lawmakers. Over 50% of cars sold in the USA are made there. However, six questions need to be answered before this program gets the green light:

1. Is it appropriate to single out one industry for government subsidy, no matter how significant the percentage of industrial consumption it accounts for? Will a car subsidy undercut sales of new household appliances, for example?

2. Will a car subsidy simply bring forward sales that would have been made in future years? Or will a scrappage program encourage consumers who have never bought a new car to do so for the first time?

3. Should the subsidy be restricted to small cars? To fuel-efficient cars (however defined)? To all cars made by the American "Big Three"? To all American-made cars (whether manufactured by GM or Toyota), or open to all cars of any origin?

4. Given annual emissions inspections in most states, are there enough fuel-inefficient nine year old cars in the USA to justify the bureaucracy involved to provide this incentive? The average car on the road in the USA is close to nine years old, while the average light truck is 6.5 years old.

5. Will a taxpayer-funded rebate be passed through to consumers or will car manufacturers and dealers simply cut their discounts proportionately, leaving effective retail prices unchanged?

6. What percentage increase in new car registrations is needed to justify the program costs to the taxpayer, at alternative rebate levels? Goldman Sachs considers a 15% increase in year-on-year vehicle demand possible.

Bill Ford, Chairman of Ford Motor, says in a recent Fortune Magazine article: "We urge lawmakers to quickly implement this market-based incentive. It constitutes a clear win for the consumer, the economy and the environment." Do you agree?