A property tax would constrain land acquisition

Without a property tax, what is to prevent people from being greedy and selfish and owning more land than is acceptable to the Lockean proviso? If we have no property tax, or equivalent, then people will be able to acquire any amount of land and property.

Ownership is contingent on having not been selfish

Ownership of property is not valid if the Lockean proviso has been violated. Any wealth held above this limit is illegitimate wealth. It is illegitimate to own anything which violates the Lockean proviso. For ownership to be valid we must have left enough to others, and (have) not been greedy. If we have been too greedy then we do not own our assets. Ownership is contingent on (lack of) greed. We can only own something if we have not been selfish.

A property tax would reduce the harm caused by greedy and selfish landowners

Greedy landowners can be prevented from being a hindrance and burden on the communities within which they live if we have a tax, or levy on the ownership of property. A property tax (with a high personal allowance) would reduce the harmful effects of domineering property ownership by a small number of people. If people are prevented from owning more than a sufficiency of property then land will be used more efficiently.

Land is used more efficiently if the rich are forced to sell their land

If rich people are forced to sell their assets, specifically land, this will result in more efficient use of resources being made. We can use resources more efficiently if the rich are forced to sell their assets and property, the subjects (natural resources and raw materials) more than instruments of labour...

If people have no land they cannot survive

If we have no land of our own we cannot survive because we must eat and for that we need sunlight to fall onto the land which grows into crops and meat. If we are denied land then there is no possibility to survive. To deny land to others is similar to killing them directly. We cannot be self reliant if we have no land of our own. The Welfare State is perhaps justified if people are denied land. If people have no land they have no means to provide for themselves and so the landowners owe succour and protection to the poor.

A property tax would encourage the rich to sell their land

For a Society to make the most efficient use of property, it would be best to have disincentives against excessive hoarding of property, according to the Lockean proviso. If the land is held by too few individuals then this is not efficient. Not enough people have (sufficient) property of their own. Private home and land ownership can be increased with a property tax, with a high personal allowance. High house prices prevent people from owning their own home. We cannot acquire property if there is no reason for a person to sell it which there won't be as a result of the rental income available on land. We can encourage rich people to sell their land and property with a property tax.

Excessive property acquisition can be restrained and prevented with a property tax

If land is held disproportionately, the free market cannot be relied upon to ease the suffering of those without land. Ownership of land should be (is) contingent on the Lockean proviso that we have left enough for others.

If the prevailing property allocations are to continue unthreatened (in the absence of a revolution) then it would be helpful to make them more equitable by imposing a property tax, with a high personal allowance. This restrains unfair property acquisition.