History

The main objective of this article is restricted to examining foundations utility from a general perspective. The foundations as put forward by Turgot are explained in the manner in which they are associated to the good of the public and to some extent, demonstrate some of the disadvantages involved. According to Turgot, a founder is an individual who wishes to lengthen his or her own wills effect for eternity. However, even if such an individual is granted motives that are absolutely pure, and there is absence of several grounds on which his enlightenment can be questioned, it might be argued that when ones intentions are clear that he or she wants to do good, doing harm is not easy.

Turgot suggests that foreseeing with high certainty degrees that a particular foundation will in future produce the initial objectives, instead of one that produces effects that are contrary is like hiding behind an illusion of apparent or near good and thus failing to acknowledge the evils that actually take place bringing with them unseen causes. Therefore, when developing foundations, it is very essential to take into account such evils and consider their future implications on the original effects that were intended by the founder (Baker, 1987).

Turgots foundations
In most cases, foundations assist a few people against a certain evil, when the cause of such evil is universal, and at times the applied remedy to the effect has the result of increasing the causes influence. For instance, when establishing asylum houses for the repentant women, for them to gain entrance, they have to provide some proof of life that is debauched. This particular precaution was mainly devised in order to ensure that the foundation is not in any way diverted to serve other goals other than the intended ones. But critically looking at the precaution, does it not prove that it is not possible to curb debauchery through the use of such establishments, which are not related at all to the true causes of the foundation. The debauchery case is also applicable on poverty poor people have claims that are incontestable on the rich peoples abundance. Religion and humanity alike impose on us the duty of relieving misfortunes that have befallen on other people. In order to fulfill these duties that are indispensable, establishments of charity have greatly proliferated in the world of the Christians and they are aimed at relieving all kinds of necessities from the great numbers of poor people who are gathered in churches and hospitals and are therefore fed through the daily distributions that are offered at the gates to convents (Baker, 1987).

Charities for helping the poor might be good and their intentions might be clear and observed fairly well. However, they bring about other unprecedented and unforeseen problems. Offering free subsistence to a huge number of people is similar to subsidizing idleness and each and every disorder originating from it, thus making the loafer condition to be preferred more compared to the getting livelihood from working. This has the implication of depriving the state since the total work that will be done within the state will decrease. The land productivity will decrease over time as more and more people prefer the loafer condition and thus avoid working. As a result, the frequency of scarcities in the state will increase dramatically and so will be depopulation and misery among the people. The generation of citizens who are industrious will in turn be replaced by one that is vile, which will mainly be comprised of wandering beggars who will eventually be involved in each and every type of crime within the society (Baker, 1987).
 
The society has obligations for its members who are unfortunate and cannot afford various basic necessities. The society should however not provide directly to these people by giving them all the basic needs they require as this will not assist such people solving their problems which will certainly reoccur in future in a much bigger way and thus impact negatively on the same society. The society should accomplish its obligation on the poor by providing them with means through which they can earn their own income. In doing so, the poor living standard of the poor will be raised and the wealth of the society and indeed that of the whole nation will increase. Therefore, the foundations that are currently operating should not be much focused on meeting the immediate needs of the unfortunate people in the society, which are primarily the symptoms of a much bigger disease, but to focus its energies in creating a source of income for such people that will run into perpetuity (Baker, 1987).

Conclusion
Turgot explains that in virtually all cases, foundations are developed to accomplish a purpose that is good for the members of the society. However, the foundations themselves eventually contradict their own original objectives by assisting in the pursuit of other goals that eventually end up harming the society. Even though the society has an obligation to the poor, it should not fulfill them in a manner that makes the unfortunate members of the society attract others and thus widen the poverty and crime brackets within the society.