Affective debates of Finnish welfare state imaginary amidst financialization: Case of equity savings account for newborns

Abstract

In 2023, the newly elected Finnish government proposed the Equity Savings Account for Newborns (ESAN), reflecting asset-based welfare policies that emphasize personal asset accumulation. This study examines social media discussions surrounding ESAN to assess its reception and affective positioning within the Finnish welfare state imaginary. Using affective-discursive methods, we show how ESAN ignited divergent public responses: some expressed resistance and insecurity, linking the proposal to austerity measures, causing uncertainty and instability. This resistance was in turn challenged and directed towards welfare practices and claimants. Others articulated optimism, framing financial markets as potential enablers of welfare sustainability. These affective debates reveal tensions between financialization and established welfare norms, illustrating how welfare state imaginaries are discursively and emotionally legitimized. The findings contribute to understanding how financialization of the welfare state is negotiated in Nordic contexts, and how financial logics are embedded in visions of social policy amid fiscal pressures of the states.

Introduction

The postwar Finnish welfare state has been founded on the core values of egalitarianism, solidarism, and universalism, which promote national cohesion. In practice, all citizens are both benefactors and beneficiaries, contributing to the state through high progressive taxation while receiving various social services and benefits throughout their lives. An extensive welfare state, which provides a public security net and allocates market risks posed to individual citizens, has become a normative objective. However, over the past few decades, the maintenance of the welfare state has been increasingly contested both in practice and discourse. The welfare state is facing a fiscal crisis due to sluggish economic growth, demographic changes, and rising service costs. Neoliberal reforms, including austerity policies, cuts to public debt, retrenchment of social security, and market-based solutions, have fostered political and cultural shifts in Finland's welfare policies (Hoppania et al., 2024; Kantola and Kananen, 2013). Austere policy measures are often justified by appealing to citizens’ emotions, including inducing fear over unmet budget reductions (Autto and Törrönen, 2019). Despite pressure for reform, there has been continuous support for the welfare state and its redistribution of welfare policies to mitigate inequality, even among the elites (Im et al., 2024).

In this article, we explore public discussions on the sustainability and future of the Nordic welfare state by analysing the reactions to a radical new policy proposal: the government's proposition to make all children investors. The government would establish an Equity Savings Account for Newborns (ESAN) for each newborn in Finland, with an initial donation from the state. In Finland, equity savings accounts are accounts where money can only be invested into the stock market, particularly in direct shares. This proposition demonstrates the ongoing financialization of the welfare state, as financial markets and instruments – along with their inherent risks – become central to social policies and, consequently, everyday lives (Hoppania et al., 2024). Similar accounts to ESAN have been identified as instruments of financialization in welfare policy (e.g., Finlayson, 2009). These accounts exemplify asset-based welfare (ABW), which aims to support and encourage individuals, particularly disadvantaged groups, to accumulate assets. ABW policies may be particularly attractive in austere economic conditions, as they aim to reduce welfare dependency and potentially allow for the ‘calling off of the welfare state’ (Hay, 2024; Mandelkern and Rosenhek, 2022; Ronald et al., 2017).

Against this background, we analyse how asset-based welfare, represented by the ESAN policy proposal, was received, negotiated, and discussed in Finland. We examine how this proposal was situated within broader conceptions of the Finnish welfare state. Our article contributes to the evolving literature of welfare state reforms, making it relevant to scholars and policymakers focused on social policy and financialization. We draw on the concept of imaginaries to observe the social order and discourses held surrounding the welfare state and its future (Jasanoff, 2015; Jensen et al., 2019; Taylor, 2004). Using affective-discursive methods (Wetherell et al., 2015), we explore how ESAN was positioned within the Finnish welfare state imaginary. We further investigated how this imaginary was affectively mobilised in public discussions. Even as a proposed policy, ESAN provides an opportunity to examine public reactions, perceptions and feelings reflected through radical welfare reforms, mediating debates on the role, meaning, and future of the welfare state. These debates reveal perceptions on social security arrangements, and the way in which financial concepts and investment practices influence these discussions.

Towards social politics of financialised and asset-based welfare

Ideas of universalism, solidarity, equality, and public responsibility are culturally and historically entrenched values, often described as enduring cornerstones of Nordic welfare states (Hänninen et al., 2019). Among the Nordic welfare states, Finland – with its comprehensive legal social rights and services – is considered one of the most egalitarian economies, having maintained this status despite slower economic growth (OECD, 2004). The state and its citizens maintain a particularly close relationship (Hänninen et al., 2019), reinforced by the extensive social security provided to all citizens and, to some extent, residents and asylum seekers. Public support for social security and the welfare state has remained strong (Im et al., 2024; Muuri and Manderbacka, 2014). However, these ideals have become contested, and Nordic welfare states have struggled to adequately address gender-related equality challenges, such as pay gaps, particularly for immigrants and ethnic minorities (Lister, 2009). Political austerity agendas and economic discourse influence how welfare states, citizenship, and gender issues are negotiated and challenged in political debates, public discussions, and social media, often through a neoliberal framework (Hirsto et al., 2014; Kantola and Kananen, 2013).

An illustrative example of this development is the growing role of financial markets and the global flow of assets, which permeate the welfare state, its institutions, and the everyday lives of citizens. The ESAN proposal exemplifies this process, conceptualised as financialization. According to Van der Zwan (2014), Financialization characterises 'the web of interrelated processes through which finance extends its influence beyond the marketplace into other realms of social life'. This reflects increased cooperation between financial and non-financial actors (Golka, 2019), with the state playing an active role in creating new markets for financial actors (Van der Zwan, 2014).

In Finland, the financialization of social policies and services is evident. Care services are increasingly outsourced to private, multinational companies reliant on financial capital (Hoppania et al., 2024), while families are increasingly relying on private insurance and healthcare rather than public services (Lehtonen, 2017). Social policies can integrate financial markets into daily life, making financialization a routine aspect of individual and family practices. This shifts the balance of power between the state, financial markets, and individuals (Hoppania et al., 2024). Consequently, financialization alters how risks are managed between the state and its citizens (Finlayson, 2009; Mandelkern and Rosenhek, 2022), with households increasingly expected to meet their welfare needs through personal efforts and assets (Ronald et al., 2017). ‘Asset-based welfare’ represents the means and demands for individuals to maintain their own safety nets through personal asset accumulation (Hay, 2024). The ESAN proposition can be understood as a policy device maintaining these principles. Michael Sherraden (1991) coined the term asset-based welfare (ABW) in his book Assets and the Poor: A New American Welfare Policy. Sherraden argued that traditional Western welfare states, which rely on income transfers for the poor, have failed to reduce poverty or create long-term change, despite alleviating economic hardship. Sherraden proposed a new approach to social policy, emphasising savings, investments and asset accumulation. In his book, Sherraden also introduced the ‘asset-effect’- the idea that income sustains consumption, but 'assets change the way people think and interact with the world' (Sherraden, 1991: 6).

ABW and the asset-effect have been used in social policy instruments, such as the Children Development Accounts (CDA), established in several countries. These accounts aim to foster developmental changes by helping individuals recognise their opportunities and capacities through asset accumulation. Children are considered particularly well-positioned for attitudinal change due to their young age and the potential for a lasting impact on their surrounding families (Loke and Sherraden, 2009). One prime example of a CDA is the British Child Trust Fund (CTF), which ESAN resembles. The CTF was first proposed in the Labour General election manifesto in 2001 and established in 2005 by the Labour government to encourage saving and fighting poverty among the poor. The CTF and its associated policies, which encourage the disadvantaged to help themselves, align with Third Way political position that combines social democratic economic policies with liberal economic thinking. However, the CTF was dismantled in 2011 due to welfare budget cuts under the influence of conservative liberalism (Gregory, 2014). Previous research suggests that policies like CTF can serve as an appealing solution and offer compromises for different political groups, depending on how they are framed. CDAs may appeal to political actors who view direct income benefits as passive and deactivating and oppose them due to their decommodifying effects while it may be supported by actors who demand redistribution and universal benefits to all citizens (e.g., Mandelkern and Rosenhek, 2022).

However, the ideas behind CDAs, including the asset-effect and the egalitarian, inclusive, and progressive goals of ABW, have been questioned in academic discourse. Gregory et al. (2022) studied how CTF mainly benefited the already wealthy, as tax incentives were favourable to those with the capability to save the most. Hay (2024) observed that ABW policies are regressively redistributive, disproportionately benefiting those already holding assets. Gregory (2014) argued that the normative connotations of the asset effect emphasise ownership and self-sufficiency, which may be unattainable for disadvantaged groups. This could be particularly detrimental in Finland, as immigrants and single mothers are disproportionately represented among last-resort benefit claimants unable to accumulate wealth. For the lowest-wealth classes, importance should be placed on securing a stable income to save in the first place (Gregory et al., 2022). However, these efforts may be undermined as real wage lags behind asset valuations, further exacerbating wealth inequalities when wealth distribution is left for financial markets (e.g., Khatatbeh and Moosa, 2022), as ABW policies tend to do. Despite these recognised shortcomings, the ideas of ABW remain manifested in the political proposition of ESAN. In this study, we will analyse the Finnish public debate surrounding proposition and how these policy ideas were negotiated within the framework of the Finnish welfare state imaginary.

Imaginaries and affects as a framework

We use the concept of imaginaries to examine how people envision the welfare state when discussing the proposal to establish an investment account for newborns. Charles Taylor (2004) defined social imaginaries as implicit, collectively held understandings embedded in stories, images and cultural narratives that enable people to imagine their social existence and what constitutes a 'good' or 'just' society. They are both normative and descriptive, offering visions of how society is and how it ought to be. In other words, imaginaries shape social meaning and normative orders, illustrating what is considered worthy and desirable in collective understanding. Since the concept of imaginaries was introduced, it has often been used to refer to visions of desirable futures and fictional expectations that are collectively imagined and institutionally embedded (e.g., Beckert, 2016; Jasanoff, 2015). Imaginaries also shape the discourse on welfare, as seen in pro- and anti-welfare narratives (Jensen et al., 2019). Given its economic and financial nature, the ESAN proposition can be seen as a medium for the prevalence of ‘economic imaginaries’ (Beckert, 2016). Economic rationalities, decisions, and valuations are shaped and conditioned by culture (Beckert, 2016). Popular culture and mass media shape what is considered (un)desirable or worthy (Jasanoff, 2015), circulating and animating imaginaries in public debate (Jensen et al., 2019).

Imaginaries are time- and space-sensitive; shaped by historic normalisations and naturalisations that guide present and future perceptions and their possible realisations (Jasanoff, 2015). Investing serves as a key example of how imaginaries function, as it inherently represents an ‘imaginary of the future’ anchored in ‘fictional expectations’ (Beckert, 2016). In this study, we use imaginaries, and especially welfare imaginaries, to cover visions that relate to the present moment, the Nordic welfare state and how welfare provisions are organised as well as to visions of the future. We acknowledge that imaginaries do not constitute shared understandings marked by definitive and unambiguous consensus, and that they are subject to transformation. Imaginaries shape and are intertwined with societal practices, enabling, reinforcing, or challenging them (Jasanoff, 2015; Taylor, 2004). Thus, by studying imaginaries, we seek to highlight how the welfare state and especially welfare provisions are subject to ongoing political and public negotiation, with financialization bringing new aspects to imagining its future.

Further, in this article we explore how affect shapes imaginaries and how these imaginaries are affectively mobilised. Affect is defined as forces circulating within social relations and practices (Wetherell et al., 2015). Affects can move and restrain individuals (Ahmed, 2010) through affective states such as safety, stability, unsafety, and instability. They can be captured discursively, primarily through the emotions attached to social, cultural, and politically formed affective compositions. However, these affects are often not identifiable and manifest without clear reference to explicit emotions (Berlant, 2011). Affects can manifest as either enlivening or flattening, shaping the capacity to act or not act. Imaginaries can be understood as holding emotive registers of adherence and belonging (Jasanoff, 2015), which can become apparent when the social order and its legitimacy are disrupted or threatened (Jasanoff, 2015; Taylor, 2004). Thus, the imagined order can become affectively enacted and contested. We aim to trace how the welfare state imaginary is affectively highlighted, mobilised, and negotiated in social media discussions.

The case study: introducing the equity savings account for newborns to the finnish policy agenda

The ESAN proposition emerged in national news media and public discussion during the spring of 2023, coinciding with the election of the right-wing government and the publication of the 2023–2027 government program. The proposal to make children investors was part of the government's goal to 'promote a culture of ownership and make Finland the world's most financially literate nation.' The government stated: 'The Government will explore the possibility of creating an equity savings account for newborns, where the State will grant each newborn Finnish child an initial investment as part of the maternity pack.' ¹ The government program did not specify any type of investment or the amount allocated to newborns. Instead, it expressed a commitment to assess the proposal's potential and its possible compatibility with the current social security system.

Previously, the proposition was briefly introduced as part of the Finnish ‘Domestic ownership program’, commissioned by the previous coalition government of Sanna Marin (2020–2023) and drafted by private sector and finance interest groups. The domestic ownership programme proposed the ESAN as a tool for financial education: the account would be established for every newborn in Finland as part of a maternity package, with an initial donation of 300 euros from the state. Parents would receive financial information in maternity and child health clinics, and the children would be able to practice with the account at the age of 15 as part of financial education in primary school. The funds would be secured and could not be withdrawn until the child turns 18, but additional deposits could be made to the account. The proposition was also mentioned in the alternative budget for 2023 of the current Prime Minister's party, the National Coalition Party, and some members of the party had raised the proposition to the media, but without clearly defined details.

Thus, the drafting of ESAN is still in its early stage, and it remains unclear whether the policy will be implemented. At the time of the study in 2025, the government had commissioned a report from the Ministry of Finance on the potential of ESAN, due in mid-2026. Despite lobbying and promotional activities by the finance sector advocacy group, ESAN has received little attention in the media and among academic commentators. Furthermore, the international examples of ESAN or their evaluation studies have not emerged in Finnish public discourse.

However, we consider it important to capture public views in the very early stages of discussion, before more policy reports are published, alongside conceptually and theoretically informed public debates. We are interested in analysing the reception of this radical policy idea and how the public views its alignment with the Nordic welfare framework. We turn to social media discussions, which offer real-time data on societal views, complementing traditional surveys with more comprehensive and timely perspectives on controversial policy issues such as climate policies (Borchardt et al., 2025) or Universal Basic Income (Gielens et al., 2022).

Data and methods

Our analysis focused on anonymous comments from three different social media platforms. These platforms include Yle News, Reddit, and the Vauva.fi forum. These were chosen for their high volume of comments and diverse user bases. These platforms attract diverse user groups. For instance, the Finnish ‘subreddit’ r/suomi has about half a million members. According to Reddit's user study, over 80% of users identify as men, are relatively young, and about a quarter have either pursued or completed tertiary education (Reddit r/Suomi, 2021). Vauva.fi (Baby.fi in English) is one of Finland's largest online forums, owned and moderated by Sanoma Media, with approximately one to four million users per month. Vauva.fi, initially targeted at women, now attracts a diverse user base due to its popularity and low barrier participation, including men and users of varying ages and educational backgrounds (e.g., Vaahensalo, 2018). Despite its focus on family topics, discussions are user-driven reactions to timely issues. Yle.fi, the public broadcasting company's news site, does not maintain a general discussion forum but allows users to comment on each news piece separately. The comments are pre-moderated and open for only 24 hours after the publication of the news.

Comment sections are considered important for citizens’ democratic participation and engagement with journalistic content. However, growing concerns exist about emotionally charged, antagonistic, and politically polarised online discussions. Research has found that high-quality user-generated comments provided journalists with new insights through reading and participation (e.g., Graham and Wright, 2015; Wright et al., 2020).

All comments were collected in January 2024, with 215 from Reddit, 225 from Yle, and 264 from Vauva.fi. Excerpts are labelled with an abbreviation for the platform (Reddit = R, Yle = Y, Vauva.fi = V) and the number of comments, either chronologically (Yle, Vauva.fi) or by number-coding given by the researchers (Reddit). Excerpts were chosen to clearly exemplify the analytical points, with similar pieces used to reinforce the points.

Ethical considerations of this research concern the privacy of the participants in online platforms. Since the comments contained personal data (e.g., political opinions), an impact assessment was conducted to identify, evaluate, and control ethical risks, along with a privacy notice. Ethical approval was not required, based on the Impact Assessment and the University of Eastern Finland's guidelines. All comments are made under anonymous usernames, making it difficult to identify commentators. However, on Reddit, post history can be traced, potentially linking user data to identification. Thus, Reddit comments are referred to by numbers given during the analysis. The excerpts provided in the analysis are translated from Finnish to English, further hindering the identification of commentators.

Comments were diverse in tone and content. This study focused on welfare negotiations. Our analysis uses affective-discursive methodologies (Wetherell et al., 2015) to interpret perceptions, experiences, and emotions in public social media discussions. We ask the following questions: 1) How was the proposition of ESAN, representing asset-based welfare ideas, positioned within the Finnish welfare state imaginary? and 2) how this imaginary is affectively mobilised in the discussion? A preliminary reading of the data revealed that a significant number of comments express views on issues of social security and the welfare state. In the first phase of the analysis comments were coded based on perceptions of the proposition and/or the associated meanings and practices of welfare. This was analysed through the theoretical lens of the Finnish welfare state, as outlined in previous research, and how the comments represent this continuum. Previous ABW research was used to illustrate how ESAN and investing were negotiated within the perceptions of the Finnish welfare state. These were considered alongside concepts regarding stances on welfare arrangements, particularly social benefits (see e.g., Gielens et al., 2022).

Following this, in the second phase the comments were categorized based on what they contain. Main categories outlined the reception of the proposal, the current state of social security, and the future of social security. These were formed from subcategories that contained, for example, the critique of the proposal, advocacy of the proposal, issues with the current state of social security, issues with ongoing changes in social security, issues with different types of benefits, and benefit claimants. In the third phase, the focus was on how the categorized comments were presented. Comments were thus further coded based on affective-discursive reading of feelings, moods, tones, and diction to understand how these perceptions are presented and mobilised. This led to an understanding of the broader framing of the discussion, centred on the societal and political context of the state's fiscal crisis, austerity policies, and welfare cuts. Coded affects included, for example, ridiculing, disapproval, anger, fear, hopelessness, hostility, contempt, hope, and enthusiasm. Additionally, we analysed whether affects were absent and how such comments were presented.

The final categorisation grouped perceptions of social security, including its purposes and perceived challenges, and how these were represented. Three main categories representing negotiations of the welfare state imaginary were formulated: the preservation, challenging, and financial re-imagining of the established welfare state. These negotiations were mobilised mainly through uncertainty, instability, and insecurity alongside optimism linked to investing. Next, we present the results, beginning with the general denial of ESAN as an attempt to preserve a threatened welfare state. Second, we show how this denial, along with the current welfare consensus, is challenged. Finally, the discussion suggested how some shortcomings of the welfare state could be addressed by financially re-imagining ideas and practices.

Welfare imaginary under threat: Negotiations of (deteriorating) social security mediated by the proposition of ESAN

The discussions revealed the current Finnish welfare state imaginary and elicited varying affective reactions and stances. First, the proposition was understood as a neoliberal policy linked to a continuum of austerity measures and the erosion of social security. Some commentators perceived ESAN as a benefit that might partially replace Finnish social security (cash benefits). These comments reflect the uncertainty surrounding the future of the welfare state and the discomfort – even rage – fuelled by neoliberal reforms, austerity policies, and welfare cuts. Furthermore, the ESAN proposal, associated with the right-wing political agenda, was criticised and disapproved.

In the comments, critics invoked discrimination to highlight the normative values and ideals of the Finnish (Nordic) welfare state, emphasising its purpose, scope, and the need to preserve these principles. Some comments outright rejected the proposition, expressing irritation through short remarks: ‘I do not know whether to laugh or cry’ (Y111), ‘Now turn on the lights!’ (V9), ‘I thought this baby stock savings account was a joke, but it wasn't’ (V13). Some comments ridiculed the government, its budgetary cuts to social security, ideological stances, and its lack of understanding of the daily realities faced by struggling families. ESAN was deemed to offer no relief. Comments highlighted the austere conditions reinforced by government policies, calling out the account's impertinence and absurdity in pessimistic and frustrated tones of the responses.

The government lives in a middle-class bubble with no contact with the everyday lives of the poor and low-income people. In a world where child benefits don't go to running costs, but to a child's investment account, a government-ready stock savings account is a 'smart' and 'really nice gesture.' For families with children who were already in a tough situation and whose subsidies are being cut by the government, the stock-savings account work is mostly grotesque. (Y135).

The critique of the proposition is positioned within a moral discourse, addressing issues of economic inequality and highlighting societal norms (Ödmark, 2023). Some comments emphasised that the government appears to lack understanding of Finland's social security system, which is considered ‘general knowledge.’ One comment even stated, ‘not even the basics are known at the ministerial level’ (V18).

Comments reflect and evoke future scenarios that could follow policies like ESAN, including cynical remarks about how the account could lead to the further deterioration of current welfare institutions, such as the abolishment of student aid, introducing tuition fees, and halting pension payments (R48). Comments emphasise how the austere political direction threatens children's access to a ‘safe and stable environment’ and undermines parents’ ability to ‘secure basic income.’ This, in turn, could ‘erode the psychological security and belief in the future’ (Y21). Right-wing motives and cuts to or abolishment of social benefits are seen as actively producing ‘suffering’ (V19) and leading to ‘effective impoverishment’ by ‘interfering with the constitution’ (V201), appealing to the legally solidified stability of the welfare state. These comments reflect the critique of ABW policies found in previous literature, suggesting that such policies may further deteriorate conventional redistributive welfare (Hay, 2024).

The evocation of these future scenarios, alongside the dismissal and criticism of ESAN and the government's planned austerity measures, can be seen as an affective response to a perceived threat to the held welfare state imaginary. The imaginary was mobilised to reinforce collective ideals, ensuring certainty for the future, institutional stability, and security of livelihood. ESAN mediates perceptions of investing practices that, if applied to social benefits, would subjugate the collective safety nets and people relying on them to uncertainty and insecurity. Pessimistic depictions of distress, suffering, and insecurity, particularly concerning families and children, highlight the current welfare state imaginary and its affective components. Its mobilisation was expressed defensively, though with exhausted or hopeless tones, leaving only the option to ‘watch and laugh’ and see the undesired unfold. This is reinforced by a political climate and policies that actively undermine the stability of welfare practices.

This served as a counter-discourse to welfare imaginaries shaped by neoliberalism and austerity measures, reinforcing alternative visions and ideals (e.g., Jensen et al., 2019). Comments called for the revocation of proposed austerity measures, deeming ESAN inapplicable both practically and ideologically. ESAN, a financial risk-laden instrument, is positioned in opposition to the principles that welfare is meant to stand for, rather than maintaining a sense of security through collective risk-bearing. The proposition presents a threat to welfare practices and purposes, undermining their stability. ESAN fosters insecurity by directly infusing families and the future with uncertainty.

The established welfare imaginary became evident, highlighting normative views on welfare matters. The commentators engaged in the negotiations on the welfare state, its practices, and arrangements, discussing what is idealised and desired. Their contrasting remarks highlighted ‘what is foul’ and ‘what invalidates the practice’ (Taylor, 2004). Previous research on Finnish opinions on welfare has shown that radical ideas are often negatively received, with people adhering to established arrangements (Forma et al., 2007). ESAN, as an instrument for accelerating financialization and elucidating the deteriorating welfare state, is seen as illegitimate and inapplicable to the established Finnish welfare state, as highlighted in the comments. Further negotiation and positioning of ESAN will unfold within these frames, which we discuss next.

Welfare imaginary as a restrictive depiction

Not all commentators viewed ESAN as a threat to the social security system, nor did they seek to preserve the welfare policies. In contrast, the insecurity and widespread comments on the austere political atmosphere mediated by ESAN became mobilised in contradicting tones. Some commentators affectively mobilised (or demobilised) the welfare state imaginary by redirecting the perceived reluctance and pessimism toward the proposition (observed in the previous section) against traditional welfare policies and those supporting them. Rather than seeing current social security and its preservations as necessary, these comments sought to problematise it. This could be interpreted as challenging of the established welfare state imaginary.

Social security, particularly income transfers, is seen as a passivating alternative, discouraging individuals from taking financial responsibility. Comments criticise this welfare ‘blindness’ and ‘dependency’, reflecting the consensus in the comment sections about the ‘fear of a reduction in subsidies’ (Y176). ESAN is depicted as being rejected for failing to provide ‘as much laziness money from the government’ (V64), as it became contradicted with traditional benefits. ESAN is seen as a potential solution to ‘discourage making children dependent on income support’ (V89).

When you read these comments, you get the impression that the worst thing that can be done is to weaken the subsidies. Hasn't the intention been to dismantle the incentive traps? People have become blind by staring only at the fear of a reduction in subsidies. Not accepting work, not taking stock, and all these other activities are going to be drastically curtailed, not subsidised, but reduced. The intention should be to reduce the dependency on subsidies, to make as many people as possible not dependent on subsidies. Stock saving and investing in funds would be one such thing, but people have strong prejudices that it would only be a thing for the rich. Even with a small monthly amount, you can get yourself a good nest egg and, at the same time, boost corporate funding. It can't be helped if people don't want to understand this. (Y176).

These perceptions and tones stem from the affective discourse surrounding welfare, as reflected in the comment sections. Commentators evoke emotions, attitudes, and behaviours associated with welfare, presenting them in negative, moralising, and offensive tones. These comments aim to dismiss the experiences and feelings expressed by other commentators regarding threatened welfare. A defensive view of welfare is seen as a psychological and affective barrier that keeps people dependent on subsidies. This aligns with comments made about last-resort benefits, which prevent households from accumulating personal savings or assets. The ESAN could limit assistance, as it would be calculated as household assets. ESAN contradicts this benefit, as the benefit cannot be claimed before the child's stocks would be liquidated and used. However, the comments frame this as a mental and attitudinal deficit, mobilising the current welfare state imaginary as harmful to the possibilities of ESAN and investing, drawing from the pessimistic tone of the comment sections.

These affective-discursive approaches also target subjectivity, as welfare is argued to produce mental and affective dependency, preventing individuals from realising their potential. This is reinforced by criticising the immorality of benefit claimants and emphasising the normative order around ownership and personal assets (Gregory, 2014). These comments seem to present the ideas of the ABW, which highlighted the futility of traditional welfare benefits in addressing intergenerational poverty (Sherraden, 1991). However, these ideas are constructed using contradictory tones. Instead of being complementary to the Nordic model (Lennartz and Ronald, 2017), ESAN, presenting ABW ideas, became a medium for delegitimising the welfare state imaginary and its endurance.

These comments circulated anti-welfare sentiments found in international literature, portraying social security, and especially income transfers, as inherently passivating ‘incentive traps,’ that create a ‘culture of poverty,’ and prevent individuals from taking financial self-responsibility (e.g., Jensen and Tyler, 2015). They also link opposition to ESAN and fears of welfare state retrenchment to ‘freeloaders’ (e.g., Saarinen et al., 2014), further stigmatising welfare recipients. The welfare consensus in Finland, appearing stable with positive perceptions (Muuri and Manderbacka, 2014), is countered. This challenging of the welfare state imaginary can be seen as a harnessed force for financialised imaginations to gain affective relevance. The polarising tones of criticism frame the welfare imaginary as a threat, opening space for financial imaginaries to influence the future welfare ideas and practices. Holding onto the current, detrimental view of welfare is seen to hinder understanding the potential for investing. Next, we examine how ESAN mediates optimistic financial perceptions and ideals to transform welfare practices.

Re-imagining the welfare state imaginary with financial rationales

ESAN carried the potential to transform the current welfare imaginary, as comments sought to financially re-imagine established practices. The welfare imaginary is portrayed as precarious, infused with uncertainty, and salvageable. ESAN and investing are positioned as optimistic opportunities and reforms needed to address the instability of some welfare practices. Social security is imagined to be reformed for greater economic efficiency and profitability, financially rationalising it. Comments suggest this could be achieved through normalisation of investing, which is concurrently seen as a way to advance equality.

In these comments, the perceived fiscal unsustainability and inefficiency of welfare are accepted and pictured as inevitable realities, with state-guided, collective investing presented as a viable solution. ESAN is viewed as an ‘excellent idea’ that should be ‘refined further’ to ‘replace’ (R126), ‘drive down’ (Y143) or ‘abandon’ (R179) the current pension system, to financially enhance it. The discursive approach depicts the ineffectiveness and instability of current welfare practices, particularly pensions.

That's a good idea, but the amount should just be much higher. With a one-time investment of €5000 spread across the global stock market, the baby would have a normal 7.5% return on investment of €383,000 at the age of 60. We could gradually drive down our entire pension system, which is costly to employers and wage earners. (Y143).

This is further reinforced by comments that reference the political atmosphere and the wider pessimistic tone of the discussion, depicting current welfare practices as a ‘burden’ (Y137) and how the cuts are inevitable by the government (V43). The sustainability of the pension system, partly based on a pay-as-you-go system and partly on reserved funds with investment returns (e.g., Sorsa and Van der Zwan, 2022), became an affective point of reference, especially in Finland, where fiscal and generational sustainability are timely concerns. In these comments, ESAN is positioned as a potential and positive opportunity for applying financial market solutions to welfare practices, aiming for effective profit maximisation and addressing the economic impracticalities of welfare.

Comments that perceive the ESAN as a viable idea, and thus remark on its potentiality, mostly refer to the unquestioned economic rationality of investing and the depicted inevitable profitability of financial markets based on stated historical truths and continuities. Numbers, such as the average net return of around 7%, are brought up to provide intelligible and stabilising anticipation of financial returns, acting as a tangible measure for the possibility of financeable welfare through stock markets. The risks of investments are ignored, and a sense of certainty is created by depicting the average stability of long-term returns, thus concealing and containing the insecure character of stock investing. The numerical simplification seemingly tames uncertainty in the future positioning of anticipated profits and in securing collective welfare practices and their stability. The speculative nature of investing (Beckert, 2016) contrasts with the welfare state's affective qualities, centred around a (threatened) sense of certainty, stability, and security, seeking to contain them. This can be seen as a performance of trust and belief, aiming to financially re-imagine welfare and mobilise the threatened welfare state imaginary to legitimise financial market solutions.

ESAN further mediates financial ideals and their application to welfare practices through negotiations of (in)equality. The proposition evoked associations indicated in the theories of ABW, and some comments highlight the potential of ESAN to promote investment and understanding of financial rationale. The account could thus reduce class differences (V78), ‘promote equality’ (V93), ‘reduce inequality’ (Y11), or at least give everyone ‘equal opportunity’ (V148).

In my opinion, opening an investment portfolio to every child is a good step, and ideally, it would teach the working class frugality and investing. Every smart parent could channel child benefits into the same portfolio, as is already the case in middle-class families. If someone builds their entire family life and their child's entire childhood on social assistance, they should face strong penalties. (V78).

The affective tone mediates the optimistic prospects provided by the account and what it could do, in contrast to traditional benefits. The comments take on virtuous goals, presenting investment through welfare practices as a way to advance traditional egalitarian ideals linked to the Nordic welfare state and address class differences and wealth inequality. Saving and investing are framed as desirable middle-class ideals, which traditional benefits, that promote consumption, cannot achieve. In ABW policies, promoting inclusion and offering everyone the opportunity to participate in saving activities is essential (Loke and Sherraden, 2009), with comments maintaining similar ideas. However, investing is narrowly presented as an opportunity, downplaying the material realities of less-wealthy and disadvantaged groups. The discussion focuses only on class, and what remains silenced is the intersectionality of disadvantaged groups. For example, immigrants and single mothers are overrepresented in Finland as claimants of last resort benefits, leaving issues of ethnicity and gender unaddressed. Especially in these groups, social benefits may be fully used to meet essential needs, which often remain unfulfilled, leaving no room for saving for the future.

These negotiations address questions of redistribution, its scope, and how it should be implemented. ESAN, presenting ABW ideas, introduces investment concepts into social security (Mandelkern and Rosenhek, 2022). The discussants view that social benefits could be allocated more profitably and more equally through ESAN. As a welfare practice, ESAN continues to mediate the welfare state's ideals of equality, which are renegotiated in financial terms. The welfare state imaginary is harnessed in its ideals and practices, influencing the legitimation of financial ideals and rationales. Simultaneously, these rationales enter into negotiations concerning the welfare state. The financial potentialities depicted in ESAN demonstrate its positioning as a desirable instrument for financially re-imagining the welfare state imaginary. This is achieved by aligning with its associated affectivities, maintaining the possibilities to amend the instability of current practices. It seeks to allocate and contain future uncertainty by trusting the average market and believing in its ability to secure individuals’ livelihoods. The optimistic prospects of ESAN draw on the ideals of the Nordic welfare state to address inequality, particularly in terms of participation in investing activities. Financial market participation is a normative goal that reinforces the desirable image of investing. These ideas illustrate how financialization enters the realm of social security, potentially influencing everyday life (Finlayson, 2009).

Conclusions

Our results illustrate how the welfare imaginary was mobilised in social media negotiations to preserve, challenge, and financially reimagine it. First, ESAN can be interpreted as presenting threatening ideas for the established Finnish welfare state, exposing the current order to uncertainty (Taylor, 2004). This highlights the controversial nature of ESAN, representing the ideas of ABW, when situated within the Finnish welfare state imaginary. Nevertheless, the account, even as a proposition, mediates and forwards future imaginaries (Jasanoff, 2015) that allow the scrutiny of the held welfare imaginary and negotiations of legitimacy (Taylor, 2004). The circulating affects on social security were translated and mobilised in various ways, determining which financial ideas, ideals and individual imaginations could ‘stick’ to and gain relevance and legitimacy. Second, circulating uncertainty, along with institutional instability and insecure livelihoods, is mobilised in the presentation of financial imaginations to challenge the current traditional welfare imaginary and its defensive consensus. Third, welfare questions were negotiated by financial reimagining, evoking financial rationality and the calculative possibilities of investing (Beckert, 2016). The ESAN was seen as an optimistic opening, promoting equality and continuing to adhere to the egalitarian ideals of the welfare state.

Interestingly, questions on equality considered only class and wealth; gender, ethnicity, or different family types (from supposedly heterosexual two-parent nuclear families) were excluded from the discussion. For example, the position of single mothers and immigrants who present a great portion of last resort benefit claimants and thus face poverty, remained absent from the discussion. Outside the scope of this article remains how ESAN, if realised, will affect different groups. Not just wealth, but also language, family type, access to bank-services and information may affect or even act as a barrier for the equal use of the account, which will demand further studies.

This article illustrates how a radical political proposition is received and negotiated within collective imaginaries. We note, however, that the social media data only capture the perceptions of some individuals. This limits the views to those with the means to access discussion, including factors such as technical proficiency, language barriers, or simply interest in participating, not being representative of the Finnish population. Furthermore, the ‘established’ welfare imaginary we present can be seen as simplified and relies on limited data and views. For example, if discussions were to centre on who deserves collective safety nets and to what extent (families with children, the unemployed, elders, immigrants, and minorities), opinions may vary, though this was not prevalent in our data. We have sought to address this limitation by positioning our results with former literature on Finnish public perceptions of the welfare state in discussions with international welfare research. Negotiations on established ideals and practices of Nordic welfare states are more nuanced and are undergoing changes (see Kantola and Kananen, 2013; Lister, 2009).

The concept of the imaginary captures the spread of financial ideas and perceptions, showing how they are formed, mobilised against the background of an established welfare understanding and become negotiated reactively with issues of social security. Even as a proposition, ESAN functions as a policy device for the financialization of everyday life, translating cultural ideas with financial instruments, and shaping perceptions and ideals of the welfare state (see also Finlayson, 2009). Welfare, even in its ideational and imaginary form, may ‘increasingly be used to control, ration, order and direct how we spend our time’ (Jensen et al., 2019), shifting the power to financial markets and responsibility to the individual (Mandelkern and Rosenhek, 2022). This may disproportionately favour those with available assets (Hay, 2024), as financial markets and capital are further legitimised, not just practically with tax policies or the outsourcing of welfare services for private profit. This is also ideationally driven, as the purposes of the welfare state are renegotiated in financial and economic terms and rationale.

The consensus on the Finnish welfare state still holds lines against this development, seeking to imagine differently, preserving desires and values outside economic profitability and speculation. Yet, the shared, collective understanding of what a welfare state should be, along with its national and historical importance, forms also a reference for financial imaginaries to unfold as part of this shared understanding. The affective ‘value’ and consensus on the welfare state, as discussed here, can be exploited and harnessed as a force that may become socially and politically enforced through propositions such as ESAN. Negotiations regarding the purpose and limitations of the welfare state have the potential for financial ideals and practices to gain relevance and legitimacy.