This is a photo taken in a smoking room in a Japanese bar. The top left says 'Do you know the ways tobacco taxes are used?' bottom right 'tobacco raises 2billion yen (~$20b) it is used by the government to enrich the lives of the people.' underneath that is the logo and name of the national tobacco association.

N.b: I have paraphrased theranslation to make it fit better.

So why are facts on how the taxes are used classified as propaganda?

Is there a estimate of tabacco related medical cost each year.

Nope

I implore you to critically engage with what propaganda is.

propaganda

prŏp″ə-găn′də

noun

The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

Lol these taxes are created as a deterrent. These things are just a byproduct of getting money from that deterrent.

And what don’t you get

You got the conversion to USD wrong. It converts down to million not up.

2 Billion Yen is roughly 15 Million USD.

"propaganda"

So this perfectly falls within the definition.

Dude put up the definition of the word and it still flew over his head

Sorry, I always took propaganda to mean lies or misinformation.

Using specific facts can also be used to drive an agenda. They don't have to be made up.

For example: Local Police Department: Car break-ins are up 50% this year! They conveniently didn't tell you that car break-ins went from 2 to 3.

This poster is basically trying to imply that smoking is good because the taxes collected do so much good.

Nah it’s just information to serve a narrative basically….can be lies or legit

I love how tobacco is one of the few foreign words written in hiragana. Like, they have accepted it as truly Japanese lol

It's good for the economy, the farmers and the tobacco industry

But known to negatively impact your health and the health of people around you.

The whole point is propaganda can be anything that intentionally leaves out important information.

Minor health impact. People who don't smoke have a 3% chance of getting lung cancer. Smoking doubles that. To 6 %. 94% chance of not getting it.

Interesting numbers. Do you have any citations?

Here's what I was able to find: American Cancer Society: 2023 SPECIAL SECTION: LUNG CANCER

Page 32: > The lifetime risk of developing lung cancer is approximately 6.2% among men and 5.8% among women, or 1 in 16 men and 1 in 17 women during their lifetime (Table 6).

> However, these probabilities are based on lung cancer occurrence in the general population so the risk is substantially higher for those with a history of smoking. 15

Page 37: >The primary risk factor for lung cancer is cigarette smoking, which accounts for about 80% of lung cancer cases and deaths (Figure 4).1 Cigarette smoking increases the risk of lung cancer 25-fold in both men and women compared to people who never smoked.15

This doesn't refute what I said. The numbers are close.

Just admit you're in denial (or you're intentionally spreading incorrect information (aka... propaganda))

Double your numbers for non-smokers and smokers are 25x more likely is close?

Life time risk for men is 6.2%.

It should have been trillion yen. Sorry for the confusion.

> Life time risk for the male population, on average, is 6.2%. FTFY

This does not mean smokers have only a 6.2% chance of getting lung cancer.