This is what Thatcher said:
“I think we have gone through a period when too many children and people have been given to understand 'I have a problem, it is the Government’s job to cope with it’ … and so they are casting their problems upon society, and who is society? There are individual men and women and there are families, and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then after our neighbour … and people have got the entitlements too much in mind without the obligations..... There is no such thing as society.
She was talking about people expecting someone else to resolve their problems for them. If anything, it was a very prophetic speach, because many of the looters claimed that they were causing trouble because the State wasn't giving them everything on a plate.
I will say one thing about the poll, it's quite possible that recent events have made people more wary of helping others. The Guardian article itself referred to events like the old woman trying to claim compensation off the bus driver. I suppose the question is what people would have said a few years ago. But as I asked "is it better to walk on by". I'm glad to see people here saying that we shouldn't.
I have another question, do people need more protection against when accused of breaking the law? For example, does Chinese law need to presume innocence and require a complaining party, whether the State or an individual, to prove what they're claiming, rather than forcing the defendant to prove their innocence?
How did that presumed innocence work out for Strauss Kahn?
Old lady scams work the same way as rape allegations in that society almost always side with the prosecution.