[joelongwood]

Well, if you want to compare the situation in Argentina as it relates to the Depression in the U.S. and the public response to the banking crisis, that's a pretty dramatic difference. FDR's first act as President when he took office in March 1933 was to declare a Bank Holiday.......every bank in the country was closed. To announce this to the public, FDR addressed the nation on the radio, in the first of what would be known as his Fireside Chats. He spoke calmly yet forcefully ,and explained the situation. The American public accepted it pretty calmly, as there had already been some runs on the banks. During this time that the banks were closed, federal inspectors were dispatched all over the country to check on the fiscal stability of the banks. Those banks that were in decent financial shape were allowed to re-open, while those that were in dire trouble remained closed. After 5 days (could be wrong on the # of days), FDR then went on the radio again and said that people should deposit their money in banks again......."I can assure you that your money is safer in a re-opened bank than under your mattress." The New Deal was off and running. It had public support......Congress gave him everything he wanted. There was more legislation in the First 100 days of FDR's administration than in any other President's first 100 days before or since. Even business, which would, in time, come to hate FDR as a "traitor to his class", supported the New Deal wholeheartedly.
In a nutshell, after reading Onix's post regarding the reaction of the Argentinian people to the bank failures, I think a major difference between the U.S. during the Great Depression and Argentina now, is the leadership factor. FDR was able to gain the support of the majority of Americans early on, and they basically went along with whatever he suggested. If anyone was the right person for the time of Depression, it was FDR.....about whom Winston Churchill said, "Meeting FDR is like uncorking a bottle of champagne." Hope this helps.