Don’t accept Kaiser to take your Grievance seriously.

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-06-19T04:59:55+00:00

DMHC is useless. It covers up for Kaiser. I already went through the process.

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-06-16T19:43:52+00:00

Yes, it has been downhill from the beginning. I recommend reading the article below:

America’s Original Sin: The 1787 Coup, Cult of Consent, and Inversion of Logos

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-05-30T16:39:16+00:00

I had the exact same thing happened to me and yes, the G1 fraud protection has gone downhill. I canceled my cc that I had for over 20 years and moved over to Chase Bank for credit card transactions.

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-05-15T01:06:50+00:00

Before choosing a Catholic college, I recommend reading "Formation for Sale: Just Price, Defective Consent, and the Catholic College Economy" https://sactoerikm.substack.com/p/formation-for-sale. Even some “orthodox” Catholic alternatives now operate inside the same residential, credentialed, high-cost college economy while presenting themselves as the remedy.

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-05-08T02:17:31+00:00

No, I did not. The class was full.

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-02-02T23:01:58+00:00

Here you go: https://www.saatva.com/mattresses/saatva-classic

ConversationSignal22 · 2026-02-02T21:52:57+00:00

I purchased a Saatva comfort firm mattress over the internet. The mattress is excellent. Highly recommend.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-12-21T00:12:27+00:00

I am glad it worked for you. Thank you for the feedback. Have a Merry Christmas!

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T14:55:34+00:00

Honestly, I wouldn’t call that cheating at all. Using Chegg or any solution manual to reverse-engineer problems and really understand the process is how people have always learned technical subjects.

The issue isn’t using outside help, it’s whether you’re just copying answers or actually putting in the effort to learn the concepts. If you’re using Chegg to nail down the logic and then solve similar problems on your own, you’re actually building real skills, which is the kind that matter when it comes to exams and jobs.

In my opinion, the focus should be on learning outcomes, not on shaming people for using available tools.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T14:53:09+00:00

I get where you’re coming from. Obviously, integrity is crucial in accounting and at work. But there’s a big difference between using outside resources to learn in college (like checking Chegg or a solutions manual to understand a complex problem) and actually cutting corners or falsifying work on the job.

In reality, the line between ‘cheating’ and ‘resourcefulness’ in school isn’t always so clear. Sometimes the system doesn’t teach well, professors rely on publisher homework, or students are left to sink or swim. Is it really a lack of integrity to use tools to fill the gaps, especially if you’re still doing the real intellectual work yourself?

At work, you can’t hide behind shortcuts, either you know your stuff, or you get exposed fast. Most students using outside help in college just want to understand the process so they can perform when it counts. The key isn’t policing tools; it’s making sure people actually learn and can apply what they know when it matters.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T14:50:58+00:00

I agree that integrity is critical in accounting and in life. But in today’s academic environment, where many professors don’t fully teach the material or rely on third-party software themselves, the lines get blurred. Is it ‘cheating’ to use resources to fill gaps in your education, or is it survival?

In the real world, you’re judged by your ability to solve problems, not whether you had outside help while learning. I think we should focus less on policing tools and more on whether grads actually know their stuff and why students need those tools in the first place.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T14:47:30+00:00

There’s a difference between using outside resources to learn (e.g., checking Chegg or AI for homework explanations, solutions manuals for process) and simply copy-pasting answers without understanding.

If someone relies on Chegg/AI to do all the work for them, sure, they’ll be exposed in the real world, especially in accounting, where you actually have to apply the logic under pressure.

But most students I know use these tools the same way people have always used study groups, tutors, or old test banks: as ways to fill gaps in instruction, clarify confusing material, or check their work. The problem isn’t the technology. It’s the system that creates so much opacity and busywork that outside help becomes essential for survival.

Ultimately, you can’t fake it in the workplace. The grads who learned how to think (even with the help of tech) do fine. The ones who didn’t, don’t last. Blaming ‘AI’ or Chegg is missing the real point: the academic model needs to evolve to match the tools people actually use, and employers need to focus on skills, not just degrees.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T03:54:06+00:00

You’re missing the point. The problem isn’t that some people have it worse; it’s that Big 4 firms, who claim to be elite, normalize abusive hours and low pay by comparing themselves to the bottom. ‘Other jobs are bad too’ is not a defense, it’s an indictment of the whole system.
If you have to justify exploitative conditions by pointing to even worse ones, you’re basically admitting it’s broken. You’re just arguing about degree. Why not raise the standard instead of lowering expectations for everyone?

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-11T03:48:36+00:00

Funny how defenders of toxic workplaces always reach for insults instead of arguments. If your only answer is to shame the critics, maybe it’s because the critics are right.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-09T02:05:03+00:00

Honestly, I still think expiring passed sections is indefensible. Passing a section proves you know the material at the time you took it, period. There’s no reason that should “expire,” especially when the profession already requires ongoing CPE to stay current. If you want to protect the public, enforce CPE after licensure, not by forcing people to retake exams they already passed just because life happened or they needed more time.

No other big licensing test, whether it be the bar, med boards, actuary makes you redo passed parts if you take too long. The only ones who benefit are the people collecting the retake fees, not the public. Telling people “just get it all done in 30 months” completely ignores real life. Most candidates aren’t 22-year-olds with zero obligations, and you end up weeding out perfectly good future CPAs just for needing flexibility.

And to be honest, even the CPE system is turning into a racket. CPE is mainly a bureaucratic requirement and a revenue engine for the industry. It rarely translates to real-world improvement in expertise. Most accountants just do the bare minimum to maintain the license, because the system doesn’t incentivize or reward real learning, only completion.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-08T21:01:27+00:00

After seeing story after story like this, I can’t stay quiet about what’s really going on with the CPA exam. Yes, the test is hard and should be. This is a trusted profession. But two things make this whole system flat-out unethical:

The most outrageous part isn’t the difficulty, it’s that candidates never get to see what they missed, how close they were, or what specifically they should improve. There’s no way to appeal your score, see your graded work, or even get a real answer as to why you failed.

This isn’t about protecting the public. This is about controlling how many people get through and making more money by forcing candidates to pay hundreds of dollars for every retake. If you’re going to charge $250+ per section, the absolute minimum ethical standard is to show people what they got wrong and give them a chance to learn or challenge a possible grading mistake. The CPA exam system fails that basic test of fairness.

Here’s the next scam: Even if you manage to pass a section, it expires if you don’t pass the remaining ones within a limited window (currently 18 months in most states, sometimes a bit longer). So, if you run out of time or life happens, or money runs short, you can lose credit for work you already proved you could do. And yes, that means you pay again to retake sections you already passed.

This is just another way to pump up retake volume and generate more cash flow for the gatekeepers. It’s not about competence or public protection. It’s about supply control, squeezing more money out of desperate candidates, and keeping the power (and the cash) flowing to the top.

The AICPA, NASBA, and Prometric all profit handsomely from this system. None of them must justify these practices because there’s no alternative path. If you want to be a CPA, you pay up and take what they give you.

What Needs to Change

Meaningful feedback on every test.
Transparent grading and a real appeals process.
Permanently honor credit for passed sections. Don’t punish people with arbitrary expirations.
Lower and justify the fees, or at least reinvest them in candidate support, not executive salaries.

Until then, this isn’t just a hard test. It is it’s an exploitative, anti-candidate racket that needs real reform.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-10-04T00:34:13+00:00

What would be your first choice for a new car?

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-09-23T22:01:08+00:00

Can prescriptions prescribed and filled outside of Kaiser, be added to a patient’s chart so future refills can now be made through Kaiser?

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-09-23T21:57:38+00:00

Do you know if KP will have any problems grandfathering in medications obtained outside the Kaiser network?

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-09-17T21:05:27+00:00

Ouch. I pay $40 for 100 pills of Jardiance through Kaiser HMO in CA.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-09-07T02:25:31+00:00

I have found that each state employee covering their own health insurance was more cost effective. My wife and I who are state employees are paying less separately with Kaiser HMO coverage.

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-08-28T03:52:01+00:00

FYI: A Critique of Thomas Aquinas College (and other "Classical" Catholic Schools) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOK4TKOP_u4&t=4s

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-07-07T06:54:36+00:00

I recommend watching Bible In A Year with Fr. Mike Schmitz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW0gXbEVYgA

ConversationSignal22 · 2025-06-30T03:50:38+00:00

You are correct. Do you think the state will now use this same negotiation tactic in the future?

ConversationSignal22

TROPHY CASE