“We’ve got a bold agenda, and we’ve got to get it done.” That was the message from the deputy mayor for economic development and rebuilding, Daniel Doctoroff, speaking to a crowd gathered for lunch yesterday at the Manhattan Institute. The talk was a lively one, outlining a number of initiatives Mayor Bloomberg is undertaking, and it impressed even some skeptics. Yet we couldn’t help thinking that, as a strategic matter, what we really need is smaller government.

Mr. Doctoroff broke down the three “ingredients” of the Bloomberg economic development strategy: making New York more livable, making New York’s business climate friendlier, and diversifying New York’s economy. This may all sound well and good, but under none of these headings was there anything about tax relief. This all seemed odd to Manhattan Institute senior fellow Steven Malanga, an expert on New York City’s economy and public policy. He recounted to The New York Sun yesterday of having years ago interviewed small-businessmen in the city about economic development policy. Most of the businessmen were less interested in the current administration’s pet programs than in the tax rates and the number of tickets handed out to them by the city government, according to Mr. Malanga.

The Bloomberg administration is concentrating its energy on projects such as reorganizing the city’s Economic Development Corporation and providing better “customer service” to the city’s small businesses. New York also has “road shows” traveling to foreign countries, trying to convince large companies to relocate here. These are among the least promising ideas being pursued.

More promising ideas include rezoning of a number of areas, including the Greenpoint-Williamsburg section of Brooklyn and the far West Side of Manhattan, to allow for mixed use development. The bid for the 2012 Olympics is the linchpin of much of the administration’s policy. One of the central elements of the Olympics bid is an expensive new stadium for the Jets. Though the Jets will pay for the stadium itself, the taxpayers would be paying for the roof and the platform on which the stadium will be built. There is no conclusive data to show any economic benefit to cities when they finance such boondoggles.

“Every administration has a very long list of economic development projects,” Mr. Malanga told the Sun. “What influences the city economy far more than economic policy is tax policy.” Mr. Doctoroff, however, sloughed off the idea that high taxes will drive people out of New York City. Once again, the “because we’re New York” syndrome prevailed. But, as Mr. Malanga pointed out, New York is already losing people; it has the highest rate of outmigration of any city in America. Our population rises in absolute terms, but only because of foreign immigration. This means that the wealthy, so crucial to the economic health of the city, leave as those seeking economic opportunity arrive. It’s a cycle that the city needs to break so that we can have immigrants come to New York and find all of the opportunities that America has to offer.

“We all agree we want to roll back taxes,” Mr. Doctoroff said at one point yesterday. The assumption seems to be that we can only lower taxes once the economic development the administration wants has happened. But this gets things backward. The growth the Bloomberg administration is trying to manage will not come without incentives. It will not come until those with money and those creating jobs are ready to move into — or back to — New York City, or until new wealth is created here. The Bloomberg administration’s tax-and-spend policies have not brought such a day any closer to dawning. But we’d like to think that as the election nears this will come into focus.