Personally, I think that positive choices having a cost (negative), make the game more interesting strategically.
I fully agree with you, making everything positives with only "opportunity cost" make for a bland game. Having drawbacks allow for designing more powerful effects, and I really enjoy the whole "balance/counter-balance" mechanics that they provide, allow interlocking different options. For example, losing loyalty for taxing the rich, and using that money to pay for universal healthcare. In game design, allows "converting" loyalty to approval and growth. So you can see which resources you have a surplus of, and base your choices around them.
So yeah, I can't disagree more with this whole trend of "only positives because seeing a negative makes the player feel bad".