The repeal the 19th meme is funny but now I'm not sure that is as much of a problem.
The property requirement meant that only those with skin in the game were the ones who got to decide who governed. Without it we have paupers and indolents with the power to spend money that they did not earn or pay.
That inevitably leads to the death spiral from the famous quote:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Obviously no political movement can form based on this principle since our current "conservatives" are too spineless to even fight for voter ID requirements. But at least it is within the overton window allowing for public discussion.
When the government taxes property though, do you really own it? But largely it would seem that removing some such requirement to own land or at least pay more in taxes than you get back has doomed the Republic.
I lean toward ayn rand style minarchy where we do need a government to handle external defense and to provide a framework under which contracts can be enforced and disputes can be resolved non-violently but very little else. Even with just those basic functions the whole thing needs to be paid for somehow and property taxes are as good a way as any.
I argue that the government should be functioning solely off of Bonds.