Why Does Krueger Assume That Advocates For Government Intervention

IQDC # 4 Neoliberalism
Question 1: Why does Krueger assume that advocates for a particular policy intervention concern themselves with the possibility of future interventions?
“Certainly, the advocate of a particular policy intervention in a developing country should at least ask what forces leading to further interventions will be created by the inauguration of the policy under consideration”(Krueger 19). The way that she phrases this quote implies that an advocate of a specific policy will not want to the government to intervene with further policies because further policies will have a negative effect on the advocate. However, in implying this she fails to understand that said advocate will welcome further government intervention because of the positive outcomes that can come from them. She persuades the reader that further government intervention will be negative, through the provision of a hypothetical example that shows this exactly, where imposed price controls harm farmers which in the past advocate for government intervention.
Question 2: Why does Krueger assume that individuals within the public sector do not possess a self-interest that aligns themselves with Benthamite’s vision of social justice?

She makes the assumption here that a bureaucrat’s self-interest is not being selfish and serving the people’s best need. I understand that a bureaucrat can posse a certain self-interest that comes in conflict with their role, but at the same time she discontinues the possibility of the opposite, where a bureaucrat’s self interest lies in being selfish because of an internal belief or exterior motives. This is also true for the private sector where someone’s self-interest can lie in being selfish and helping their company achieve its mission or other internally placed