Michael Huemer is a libertarian writing for the Cato institute. He is a proponent of the Basic Income Guarantee (BIG). In an article which can be found here, he argues against LVT from the standpoint of the best way to fund a BIG. His contention boils down to opposing redistributing what people produce in a high density area to those in a low density area. He says that the Georgist ethos of “one ought to keep what they produce” is contradicted by such spatial redistribution.
In this article, Matt Zwolinski, also writing for Cato, argues that the Georgist ethos is not inconsistent.
“Mike brings up the issue of population density to show that a large part of land’s value depends on the productive activity of other people. But, really, all of land’s economic value depends on the productive activity of other people… It’s not benefitting from the positive externalities of others’ labor that’s the problem. It’s the forcibly excluding others from doing so [the higher return available given access to the best locations].
This explains why, contra Huemer, people in low-population-density areas are entitled to compensation from people in high-population-density areas. High-population-density land is, ceteris paribus, more valuable than low-population-density land.”