← Back to context

Comment by clarionbell

3 days ago

In other words, people will lose jobs with no off ramp, horses will get dumped somewhere (because they can't be used for any work, or slaughtered), city will lose one more tradition and get a bit more bland.

No. These are both explicitly addressed in the article.

  • Are they really “addressed”?

    They are mentioned as things the union is unhappy with. The city has said they’ll come up with a transition plan by next year, but there are no details and that doesn’t mean people won’t lose jobs. The bill prohibits the horses from being sold to slaughter or other rides, but doesn’t say where they’d go instead.

    I think it’s reasonable to raise concerns about both.

    • The horses will probably go to a rescue. We run one and take in and rehome lots of horses that have been seized for mistreatment via court order.

I live here and I'd be thrilled if it loses this particular dumb cruel tradition.

  • It'd be a very sad world if we banned everything which 'some' people believe is dumb and cruel.

    Meat, cars, religious practices, schools, military, anything which pollutes...

    Be careful what you're thrilled for! Diversity is good for a reason.

    • Sure, but the things you describe losing aren't overwhelmingly unpopular. But the people who live in New York want this. Overwhelmingly.

      Do you live in New York? If not, why should you have any say -- especially in keeping a performative tourist amusement around? "Dance for me, New Yorkers!"

      If you are from New York, your neighbors overwhelmingly want this. Are you against losing this because it's genuinely good? Or some more abstract philosophical reason? If it's the latter, do you apply that evenly?

      2 replies →

    • Slavery, murder, torture, rape, robbery…

      Diversity is good when it means people are free to be themselves. Diversity is bad when it means people get away with evil because no one is allowed to call them out. I am a liberal, not a relativist.