Yes. It is a somewhat-less-bad form of even more advertising. If you think paying to avoid some advertising is reasonable, why is paying more to avoid more advertising unreasonable?
If the sponsorships bug you that much, use sponsorblock.
Everybody wins. (Yes this doesn't work for heavily integrated sponsorships but it'd still get most of them.)
The original comment was proposing a new product, at a higher price point to reflect its higher costs, that /does/ cater to this expectation.
I do think, though, that if the best answer to "YouTube doesn't let me do <x>" is "pay an alternate service provider instead," it might suggest a market opportunity for YouTube to provide the same service with much less friction.