The Instigator
OliviaWilson
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kylie.Cunningham
Con (against)
Winning
18 Points

Is it racist to judge someone by their wealth?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Kylie.Cunningham
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/15/2017 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 705 times Debate No: 100999
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (3)

 

OliviaWilson

Pro

I say yes because judging someone by what they have is bad! Prejudging someone you don't know is not something you should do. Just because they're wealthy, doesn't mean they're an idiot.
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

Umm that's not how this works hon. Racist definition-a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another. Because they are wealthy doesn't mean that they are racist.
Debate Round No. 1
OliviaWilson

Pro

Yes it is Kylie. People are super judge towards people with wealth, making them racist. Everyone who is rich thinks they're superior towards poor people, therefore they're racist.
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

No no no. Racist is when you judge someone by their race, of wealth. You need to learn what racist actually means.
Debate Round No. 2
OliviaWilson

Pro

Yeah, racism is judging someone by their wealth. You literally just agreed with me. What side are you on??? And I do know what racism is, thank you very much
Kylie.Cunningham

Con

No look up the definition of racism https://www.google.com.... It is has race in the word and it means judging someone by their race. The wealth has nothing to do with racism
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Thescarecrow066 1 year ago
Thescarecrow066
Such a stupid topic.
Posted by Intolerant_Liberal 1 year ago
Intolerant_Liberal
Probably prejudiced, not racist. Classist very possibly.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: kgbisafterme// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments), 2 points to Pro (Sources). Reasons for voting decision: I agreed with you before the debate Olivia but Kylie is right. The proper word for this more of stereotyping or prejudice. And Kylie... google is not a source. Google is a search engine. And we all know what kind of stuff you can find there.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments made by both debaters, and it"s unclear that this is an assessment of either sides" arguments. (2) Sources are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to assess sources given by both sides. Merely stating that one side used a poor source is insufficient.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: FlowerCrownedBitch // Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Ummmm..... Kylie is right all the way. Olivia, to think that racism is about wealth, is stupid. You need to go back to school hon. RACism is about RACE, not wealth. I can't believe you made a debate about this ??

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn"t explain conduct, S&G or sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter appears to simply agree with Con, and never assesses specific points made by Pro or Con.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: FuzzyCatPotato// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Definition provided.

[*Reason for removal*] Not clear what this two word sentence is meant to explain. The voter is required to explain each point allocation.
************************************************************************
Posted by White_power10 1 year ago
White_power10
no one here is racist
Posted by White_power10 1 year ago
White_power10
its not racist
Posted by What50 1 year ago
What50
Here is the source.

https://www.bloomberg.com...

Heck white's living in Washington DC are on average 81 times more richer than blacks.
https://www.theatlantic.com...
Posted by kgbisafterme 1 year ago
kgbisafterme
Fine." Well if it isn't the crackerjack bastard What50." Will that do, CosmoJarvis?
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
That's a wee bit too much, KGB.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Thescarecrow066 1 year ago
Thescarecrow066
OliviaWilsonKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Topic dosen't make sense
Vote Placed by DawsonBruno 1 year ago
DawsonBruno
OliviaWilsonKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro does not show the BoP, therefore, her arguments are pretty much invalid. The arguments she did make did not make since because she does not know the definition of racism. By the way Olivia, the word you are looking for is classism.
Vote Placed by DNehlsen 1 year ago
DNehlsen
OliviaWilsonKylie.CunninghamTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con sourced a definition to racism, while the pro debater made no effort to understand the position. Con was correct in saying racism has nothing to do with wealth. I believe that Pro is also just a troll.