One counterexample, right turn on red is not allowed anywhere in any borough of NYC. And outer Queens/Brooklyn/Staten Island are indistinguishable (to me) from the rest of Long Island (suburb). (i.e. not just downtown/busy areas of NYC)

Right turn on red really doesn't belong anywhere where people could be on the street. Drivers turning red will often pull forward into the crosswalk and there may be a walk signal.

How is that any different from a right turn on green where there may be a walk signal?

In a right turn on green scenario, the driver mainly needs to be looking for pedestrians crossing and they will be crossing a different direction. In a right turn on red, their primary focus is on cars, limiting their attention on pedestrians. It also encourages creeping out into the crosswalk, blocking people from crossing on a signal.

That makes sense. Being European I’m often annoyed at not being allowed to turn right on red. Allowing it at non-pedestrian intersections would perhaps be a fair compromise.

Blows my mind you’d both tell a pedestrian to cross and also allow a car to drive through at the same time.

So you'd have every intersection come to a complete stop in all directions for pedestrian crossings? New York would come to a complete standstill.

I mean, only 15% of Manhattan population owns a car.

And thus many of them rely on the cross town busses. Which would be brought to a stop if what you propose was implemented.

Yes, NYC is not just pragmatically anti-car (which to some extent it needs to be), it is also ideologically anti-car, and that manifests in stupid rules like that.

NYC has free parking in every borough which is fairly pro-car in my (admittedly probably anti-car) circles.

The most expensive real estate per sq foot in the world and they allow people to store personal cars for free on the street. Ludicrous

That's not a stupid rule. Right-on-red is quite unsafe for pedestrians.