Given the negative responses, I'd like to strengthen the position against positive rights by stating that positive rights require slavery the extreme whereas negative rights do not.
If the government guarantees food for children (or anyone), the government must provide it. If nobody is willing to be a farmer at any rate the private or public sector affords, the government must force someone to be a farmer to produce food to fulfill their positive right grant.
You induce people to do things with payments, not slavery. Or you ask for a volunteer corps. Or you have the army do it if all else fails. I presume you are opposed to the existence of standing armies if you are opposed to slavery in all forms as well as wage slavery.
I'm less opposed to standing armies because a voluntary contract is entered by both parties. I am not a fan of the draft or compulsory service.
My example was an edge case. I expect the government could find a price that someone would take long before they required slavery. But it still stands that it is a potential. I prefer all transactions are voluntary, even if that means you lose your country because nobody is willing to sign up for it's defense.
Claiming support from "the vast majority" is clearly nonsense. There is little support for getting rid of social security, Medicare or Medicaid, or several other current wealth transfrr programs.
