This article asks why perceived insecurity continues to grow in societies with the most advanced welfare institutions, even as subjective well-being indicators improve. It addresses this paradox by reconstructing the relationship between three interconnected dimensions of welfare: institutional, experiential, and social-imaginary.

Methodologically, the study adopts a critical theoretical reconstruction approach. It proceeds through three steps: conceptual analysis of four key concepts (welfare, crisis, social imagination, and the possible), critical analysis of major welfare theories, and conceptual synthesis into a cyclical analytical model. The framework is evaluated through conceptual coherence, explanatory adequacy, critical consistency, and heuristic capacity.

The findings suggest that the four major paradoxes of the welfare state—freedom/dependence, decommodification/recommodification, poverty reduction/poverty reproduction, and minimal/interventionist state—stem primarily from neoliberal recommodification rather than from the intrinsic logic of the welfare state itself. These contradictions gradually erode collective imaginative capacity and reinforce social-imaginary closure.

The article further argues that rebuilding welfare requires the interaction of three complementary processes: institutional redesign, social reproduction, and the redefinition of welfare indicators. While redefining indicators is the most feasible short-term strategy, it remains limited unless accompanied by institutional and social transformation. The study concludes that the possible of welfare is not a ready-made policy model but a necessary—though insufficient—condition for any durable reconstruction of welfare, leaving its empirical realization to future research.