Bob Groeneveld's fourth sentence [Ownership question lacks dignity, July 17 Odd Thoughts, Langley Advance] states, "Ownership implies more than just 'having' something. It means that it is your choice to have it."
Here is where I thought he was going with it - until I read further:
We can choose to spend our money on all these things: car, house, shoes, clothes, etc. Also, with our own money, we can choose to go to a football game or to a chiropractor, to buy pharmaceutical drugs, or even to purchase pain from a dentist, so why can we not choose to go to a medical doctor, purchase private health care, and pay for it with our own money? Why not?
We should be able to choose, if we want to purchase socialist access to a waiting list or purchase an alternative.
We should be able to choose not to wait until the health-care-rationing government death panel issues the final solution: "Sorry, you've been using up too many of our resources lately, granny. Bye-bye- Next!"
Then when you are so sick you pray for it to be over, the government lawyers insist the pain and suffering must be prolonged at all "health care dollars' cost" to meet the gulag manual standards.
Geniuses, eh? And the only other country in the world that has this Tommy Douglasinspired, made-in-Canada system is- lightsout North Korea.
Roland Seguin, Langley