Some (few, heterodox) economists have been championing Georgism for more than a century. Some other economists[1] take it seriously enough to write refutations, explaining why they consider it to be a very bad idea.
Your post seems to consider Georgism to be obviously correct. You've got a lot more proving to do before that can be considered settled.
[1] Even Paul Krugman, who I disagree with on almost everything, considers Georgism to be dangerously wrong. This despite Krugman being no friend of the economic powers that be.
It's fair to criticise my absolute language but if I add up the top 100 most influential economists of the last century, the vast majority were in favour of LVT. There are notable exceptions, like Krugman, but let us not characterise him as representative of an equally large cohort of dissent. They are the firm minority.
Your post seems to consider Georgism to be obviously correct. You've got a lot more proving to do before that can be considered settled.
[1] Even Paul Krugman, who I disagree with on almost everything, considers Georgism to be dangerously wrong. This despite Krugman being no friend of the economic powers that be.