# Generating "Différance" or an Ontology That Is Same Old Same Old: Comment on "The Generative Mechanisms of Financial Strain and Financial Well-Being: A Critical Realist Analysis of Ideology and Difference"

## TL;DR

This commentary advises caution in labeling social policies and equity groups, suggesting a pragmatic approach for improving well-being through collective action.

## Contribution

The paper introduces a pragmatic reinterpretation of financial well-being initiatives and critiques the aggregation of policies and groups.

## Key findings

- Labels like neoliberalism and social equity may oversimplify diverse policies across welfare regimes.
- Aggregating equity-deserving groups from different contexts risks misrepresentation.
- A pragmatic public health approach is recommended for post-pandemic recovery efforts.

## Abstract

Glenn and colleagues carefully conducted a realist review of initiatives introduced in high-income countries intended to improve financial well-being (FWB) or reduce financial strain (FS) during the early days of the pandemic. They found that these initiatives were underpinned by either neoliberal or social equity ideologies, within which, social location acted on different groups. In this commentary, we suggest caution in applying labels such as neoliberalism and social equity when lumping social welfare policies; labour policies; housing and financial services policies; and service provision for health, seniors, childcare, and education across welfare state regimes. We also caution against aggregating equity-deserving groups from different contexts into a single otherness. We suggest a pragmatic reinterpretation of the study’s findings and in future examinations of post-pandemic recovery in accordance with long-standing pragmatic methods of working in public health that seek to improve population health and well-being through collective action.