:Those two are different factors. Manipulation, I shall assume, means advertising and so forth - I shall not place that with coercion.
:I am also sure that none of these can be placed into the same
boat as overt coercion.
I would ask you which is more destructive - overt coercion or covert coercion? I'm not talking about the overt coercion of prisons and torture - I'm talking about what you're talking about - paying taxes for projects you personally don't support. Personally I abhor the fact that my taxes go to pay for a military machine. I will marshal all the arguments I can to oppose this expenditure.
Covert coercion thrives on deception. It erodes trust and inspires suspicion of your neighbor's true motives. In what I consider a violently distorted consumerist society, It reinforces an ethic of "buyer beware" with all the distrust that implies. Screw or be screwed.
<::What about guaranteed employment? What about guaranteed health care, housing, and education? Is that a choice? Of course not. Why?
<:Consider what such a guarantee means. It obliges other to meet the terms of the guarantee regardless of whether or not they wish to. Cant fight for 'freedom' with slavery.>
Your use of the term "slavery" is hyperbole. As above - I object to paying one penny to the military - but I would hardly call it "slavery". You might consider the possibility that guarantees of housing, education, healthcare, etc. is a general enhancement of 'freedom' for a society as a whole. This perspective can be found in Amartya Sen's book - Development As Freedom.
You also might want to glance at a book by Douglas Rushkoff - simply titled: "Coercion".