Land value taxes not only are evasion-proof - which means they are extremely fair in applying to all equally - but they require very little administration, and no invasions of privacy, to enforce (a consequence of a person needing to include their land in the government maintained land title registry in order to enforce their ownership over it).
They are also considered by many economists as the "perfect tax" due to their economic efficiency:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax
Ultimately though the public sector will need to shrink as a share of GDP, as the LVT alone cannot support current spending levels. In other words, the trend seen in this graph will have to reverse:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long...
Two interest groups stand to lose from the change I describe:
Those who own real estate, and those whose income derives from government spending.
I would suggest the constructive path forward is to propose a multi-trillion dollar settlement package for both groups, to compensate them for the losses they would incur from transitioning to the new system I describe, which has much less government spending, and much higher taxes on land ownership.
The settlement can be paid for over subsequent decades, similar to the bonds the UK issued to pay former owners of slaves as part of its Slavery Abolition Act of 1833.
As costly as all of this sounds, it would probably actually be much less costly than perpetuating an increasingly inefficient system, which leads to escalating culture wars, and growing repression.