I disagree with it not being easy to understand, on the contrary it makes perfect sense to me. We have the vast earth we live on as humanity and all the land was here long before us and will be here long after we are gone. Now we divide some of this land up and give people exclusive rights to it. How is it not absolutely intuitive to pay everyone else, who is not allowed to use this land, a fee, rent or tax or however you might want to call it, as compensation? In turn, if you use less land to reach the same goal, i.e. you make better, more efficient use, you pay less, just like with any other resource.

The more common "rebuttal" I hear is "well the land lords will just slap it onto the rent, so no use", to which I ask "then why don't they ask for more rent already if the rentors would be willing to pay?"

Then again, people I talk with are against a wealth tax as well, claiming that property would be impossible to account for and value, meanwhile France and Switzerland, two neighbours, have no issues in that regard. At the same time, both Germany and Austria had a wealth tax until very recently.

I like your rebuttal, that is a very simple way to explain it. I’m not very good at explaining concepts so maybe my difficulties are with my method of explanation and not the subject.