Exclusionary land use is necessary for anything as basic as having privacy in your home and personal security. Shifting taxes from income to land would certainly be beneficial, but it would not eliminate monopolies.
>I would be fully for giving you the right to live untaxed if you also agree to not make use of any of the shared goods paid for by those taxes. That would be including most roads, of course.
And that would be absolutely fine. The vast majority of taxes are used for forcible income redistribution (social welfare) and government largess (e.g. miliarily occupying other countries).
If government stuck to providing national defence and roads, it could collect all the revenue it needed from something like a split-rate property tax, and there'd be no need for a human-rights-violating income tax.
Or you could destroy it by reducing the power of government to use violence to guarantee exclusionary land use.
> Violently attacking someone and/or throwing them in prison for their refusal to hand you a share of the currency they received in private trade is a grotesque violation of human rights.
I would be fully for giving you the right to live untaxed if you also agree to not make use of any of the shared goods paid for by those taxes. That would be including most roads, of course. Have fun trying to earn more that way.