> You’ve yet to explain why the people who do live there have less of a claim to the house than the wealthier people who would buy it from them.
You've yet to explain why the people living there have more of a claim to the land than anyone else in society. The model you've proposed is basically "first come first serve" (ie. homesteading principle). Except even that doesn't apply given that some of the land currently in private ownership was previously used by others, who were forced off it, via colonization in North America, and the enclosure acts in Europe. Should we return the land to the descendants of the Native Americans?
Given that land is a scarce good, and access to good land gives substantial benefits to those with access, "first come first serve" simply isn't a workable way to allocate land. Those with land are able to charge rents to those without, and they can pass this privilege down to their heirs, keeping this inequality going.
> Its not at all clear that property owners benefit disproportionately from social services, and they also pay for those services through taxes.
Here's a simple example. Suppose the government decides to build a new transit line going to the edge of the city. The rents and property values along the line will increase. And in most places, income and sales taxes fund at least part of the cost. So renters will pay some of the cost, but get no financial benefit, while also paying increased rents. On the other hand, the landowners will pay some of the cost, but they'll also profit from the increased rents and land values. Essentially, renters pay "twice" for government services: once for the actual service, and then again when the existence of the service leads to higher rents, which are then reaped by landowners.
> I think most of this recent fascination with Georgism is a result of California tax policy and doesn’t withstand a cursory economic analysis.
Basically every economist agrees with the principles behind Georgism, starting from Adam Smith and David Ricardo, and continuing to modern economists like Milton Friedman and Joseph Stiglitz, so I don't really know what you're talking about here.
You should read about the Law of Rent by Ricardo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_rent), which basically states what I have said here: land rent is equal to the marginal economic advantage, which is obviously not created by the landowner.