Except that was malicious and blocked a solution.

Beast isn't preventing in a solution. He went and gave water to villages that had been searching and begging for a solution for years. He gave cataract surgery to people who couldn't afford it. He gave them exactly what they wanted, not something worse then didn't deliver.

In a better world, either Mr Beast couldn't exist because people couldn't have 100,000 times more wealth thqn others, or there would be no one for him to help.

We don't live in that better world. To me it looks like the world is a better place because of him. He's helped many directly, and inspired others to help. The harm he has done seems to either be hypothetical, or claiming people were harmed who they themselves say are fine.

So it seems like the world is better because he is in it.

This is a hop skip and a jump from "the more you feed the homeless at a soup kitchen, the less they went to go out and get a job"

Edit for clarity: I'm not espousing that opinion, I'm targeting it.

Huh? We should feed the homeless, and we should encourage philanthropy.

Separately, we should improve our governmental systems.

Edit edit

Im specifically targeting the line about government not doing its job.

Corporate fuckery is not philanthropy, and the implication that charity diminishes governmental progress is a source I'd like to read.

Do you honestly think if Mr beast blipped out of existence that the government would step in to do all those things?

Hyperloop fucked us, true, but it feels like the campaigns Mr beast goes on aren't really interfering with government decisions.