Which of the following best explains the attitude of President Herbert Hoover when the Great Depression began in 1929?

Explanation:

Herbert Hoover was under the impression that the stock market crash of 1929 was a simple market correction, that it would go away if everybody just acted like everything was normal, and that markets simply do these things from time to time. Billboards circa 1930 with the blurb "Wasn't the depression terrible?" kind of summed up his tone-deaf approach to massive unemployment and runs on banks. He honestly believed that government intervention was not the answer.

By the time Roosevelt took office in 1933, he understood that no quick solutions were to be had. He did start a lot of public works projects, like the Works Projects Administration (which gave a lot of people short-term employment teaching, painting post office murals, and cleaning up public lands) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (which put a lot of broke farmers to work putting a utilities infrastructure in place in parts of the South, putting the pieces of a post-agricultural economy in place).

He also instituted several "bank holidays" to discourage panic-driven depositors from taking all their money out of their banks. Austerity became the new normal in America and stayed that way until the US entered World War II.

if interdependence implies a two-way dependence, and if each partner is equally dependent on the other for success, then there is an equal commitment to the making the partnership successful. the advantage is sustainability of the relationship, the disadvantage is that decisions are "democratic" and therefore may take longer to reach and more likely to be a compromise (which is not always the best solution). as the interdependence moves away from equality, the decisions become more influenced by the more independent partner. in the extreme the relationship becomes more dictatorial and more like "master-slave". generally the relationship has less commitment in both directions and is more likely to be temporary.

if one generalizes (and one shouldn't), equity partnerships, which is probably what is implied by interdependence, can be slow to progress or change but durable. the extreme alternative, independent-dependent partnerships tend to be efficient but more fragile.

hope this but you will have to site your own evidence. : )

idk