It does not necessarily mean that God wants it to exist just because God allows it to exist. Those are two separate matters. God has His reasons for allowing it to exist, not the least of which is noninterference in this world, as well as allowing humans to work things out themselves and learn form the experience so they will be more prepared in the future.
Ah, dear Trailblazer, we've been here many times before. If God is omnipotent (and omniscient, and perfect, and ...) then nothing can, nothing ever did, nothing ever will happen contrary to what [he] perfectly foresaw before [he] made the universe. And since [he] made the universe like that, it is always and only the universe all of whose details [he] foresaw and intended.
Given [his] omni status, there's no other possibility.
But you knew I'd say that.
You make God sound like a person, a kind of superman, but God is neither.
I'm talking about what any moral being would do. If God's a moral being then I stand by what I said ─ [he] should intervene rather than let bad things happen.
What would it cost? You assume it would cost nothing to interfere with human free will upon which the entire operation of the world is based.
There is no theological free will with an omni god. There is no physical free will in that humans can't make decisions independently of their evolved decision-making brain functions.
Besides, how do you know that God did not help through helping humans, which is the only way God can help.
A God who can only help "through helping humans" is not an omni god. Which is it?
Those vaccines sure got developed in record time.
That's a humanist line, not a theological statement. It's a human problem and humans must fix it, and the vaccine projects haven't done a bad job.
God is not subject to morality because is not a human. Only humans have moral responsibilities.
Then if your God exists, I reject [him] outright as meaningless in my terms.