It's definitely about money, but "inequality" makes it sound like the fact that other people out there are wealthy is the cause of antisocial people destroying property to pay for drugs
I would posit that a society of reasonably well-off people would be less likely to steal guardrails for drug money than a society with a lot of poverty.
I would guess certain voting patterns would be different too, for that matter.
Perhaps part of that is: what underlies the inequality? Are folks getting wealthy by good old-fashioned hard work? Or something else?
> The details will seem foreign to many in the West, where building home equity is baked into the system. But the central idea is simple: What if homeownership had no profit motive and no capital gains?