Your father obviously understands Franklin's quote about just that trade: You are only getting an empty promise for sacrificing your liberty. Why would the state live up to it's promise? You gave away the means to enforce the deal.
I view it a little differently from a government point of view, of course there would need to be strictly enforcible regulations on what a person can be compelled to do and what they cannot, fundamental human rights would remain intact obviously. However since a person who would be offering you a way out has an incentive for you to live a productive and healthy life via equity ownership it would be a similar endevor of a small business owner exchanging 75% stake ownership in his company to a venture capitalist, not every person would be considered investable, because VCs want a return on their investment of course. Both parties have incentives for the person in bondage to reach his full potential.
I was more referring to Giantdragon's BIG. That African child is more like many apprenticeship relations. For example a friend of mine was trained as a pilot for the 737 by Lufthansa, under the condition to work for Lufthansa for a number of years (or pay up the cost of training). That is entering into a voluntary agreement with mutual benefits - not at all like slavery.
Giving up your liberty for BIG is slavery, however, and an extremely risky one at that. Slavers do not keep slaves that only incur cost. Any BIG arrangement will inevitably result in a final solution. It may take a few years, maybe a generation or two, but at some point those running the show will opt for getting rid of the burden. And there will be absolutely nothing the slaves (should we call them sheeple? ) will be able to do about it. They may not even see it coming.
[EDIT]When I think about it, maybe this is not such a bad idea. What do you think, is it immoral to fight for BIG if the motivation is to let a culling of the human population happen, even if you are then retiring and not participating in the culling?[/EDIT]