This paper critically examines prevailing conceptualizations of financial well-being and financial resilience, arguing that dominant economic and psychological approaches tend to individualize and depoliticize financial vulnerability. By conceptualizing financial fragility primarily as a consequence of deficient financial literacy, financial behavior, or psychological characteristics, these approaches risk overlooking the structural conditions that shape the economic realities of low-income populations. The analysis identifies an inherent resilience paradox: social capital, commonly conceptualized as a protective resource, may become counterproductive under conditions of persistent poverty and social homophily. Strong bonding networks can provide essential support while simultaneously reinforcing resource scarcity, solidarity obligations, and barriers to individual accumulation. The paper further examines the role of comprehensive debt counseling and demonstrates that effective interventions must account for substantial heterogeneity among financially vulnerable groups. Different forms of vulnerability, including neurodivergence, behavioral addictions, migration-related exclusion, and single parenthood, require differentiated intervention strategies. Debt counseling can provide psycho-social, legal, and institutional stabilization but cannot compensate for structural deficiencies in income, social protection, and resource distribution. The paper therefore conceptualizes financial resilience as a multilevel and political phenomenon rather than merely an individual coping capacity. Finally, it calls for culturally sensitive and cross-national research beyond WEIRD populations and emphasizes sustainable public funding for debt-advisory services as a prerequisite for effective financial protection.