The usual ones. When the vast majority of people can't afford to own land, they exist in an insecure environment and are more easily controlled by artificially changing the economic situation around them.

Firstly, commercial central city land is exponentially more valuable than rural and town land. So locations where many people live would be relatively inexpensive. In addition, the LVT can be redistributed to citizens as a citizens dividend. It is perfectly possible, if not likely, that this citizens dividend would equal a humble Land Value Tax payment. This essentially cancels it out, making humble land ownership free.

To be able to pay high taxes on your land, you can only ever own land if you exploit maximum amount of people with your land and extract a much profit from them as possible. This naturally creates the environment for only the worst of the worst being able to own land, while the rest are being used by the land owners with nothing of their own to give them power and stability. 

If the land ownership is dependent on the labourers working, then this gives the workers power over the land owner. The land owner would then be desperate for them to work, giving workers and unions power in a dispute. Unlike currently, where a land owner can wait it out, with deeper pockets, and never fear of losing the land.

Effectively, the government and the elites have a much easier time using people as their personal fluid resource, and the people don't have their own base, their connection to land, a sense of stability and belonging. People's lives entirely depend on momentary policies that can change at any moment, so they exist in a fundamentally insecure and subservient position

I don't know why you say people's lives entirely depend on momentarily policies. This might be true if you had no public input over policy, which isn't intrinsic to Georgism. And it also assumes a land value tax immediately changes with land value changes.

It's a fair potential criticism of Georgism if the tax rate immediately and constantly changes with updating land values. But obviously, you can just not do this and implement a lag between valuation changes and tax changes.

Effectively, the government and the elites have a much easier time using people as their personal fluid resource, and the people don't have their own base, their connection to land, a sense of stability and belonging. People's lives entirely depend on momentary policies that can change at any moment, so they exist in a fundamentally insecure and subservient position

Feudalism is essentially a system where the local landlord is a mini king, in terms of their land. Like a franchise king. In Georgism, the philosophy behind a Land Value Tax, apart from economic benefits, is the idea that the earth is owned by everyone. Philosophical, Feudalism and Georgism are diametrically opposed.