I used to think Bezos wanted many people living and working in space
NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns.
For commercial crew, congress demonstrated their ability to reduce the rate on funding below the agreed amount. This caused the opportunity for cost overruns for NASA to attempt to negotiate. Lack of funding (and CC funding diverted to SLS) caused NASA to miss deadlines for their side of the deal which impacted both contractors. Boeing designed their capsule for a "simple" (as rocket science gets) approval process. SpaceX's initial design was more ambitious but got trimmed back to fit the approval process that NASA could afford to take part in.
Congress will have many budgets to trim, delay and divert funding. This will give NASA ample opportunities to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes and cost overruns. Bezos has got this exactly right: adding $10B $8B to Artemis funding requirements will ease the stated limitations on congress/NASA.
Without competition, NASA’s short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won’t serve the national interest.
NASA's ambitions can be delayed with or without competition. Musk is building a Mars rocket for himself and a Lunar version of it with a firm fixed price for NASA. The National Team is offering a jobs program (federal taxes->47 states). Which is more in the National Team's interest is a matter of personal congress's opinion.
Imagine you have enough excess wealth to become a Lunar tourist. Here are you options:
Option M: There is a "flight tested" Lunar Starship near the Moon. Multiple Tanker Starship filghts will refuel a Tanker Starship in LEO which will go to the Lunar Starship and refuel it. Multiple Tanker Starship flights will refuel a Tanker Starship in LEO. A roomy luxury Crew Starship with plenty of space for a dozen tourists goes to LEO, gets refuelled and then goes to the Lunar Starship. The Lunar Starship takes tourists to the Moon and back to the Crew Starship. The Crew Starship goes back to Earth and lands the same way all the Tanks Starships did. Wild guess at a per ticket price: probably over $100M but much less than $1B.
Option B: The National Team's ride to near the Moon and back is an cramped Orion capsule (rated for two flights) launched on an SLS (dumped into the sea) for a cost of $3B. That gets you and 3 other really close friends to the Lunar Gateway. NASA will charge you money for your stay there and for any consumables used (probably delivered by SpaceX). The small Lunar Descent, Lander, Ascent stack requires a (some?) New Glenn launches (first stage reusable!) to get to the Lunar Gateway. If you want to fly before New Glenn is ready then your smaller ride to the Moon will require three launches of expandable rockets ($$$) and some assembly required (by tourists!). You get to the Moon and your ascent stage is too heavy to get back. You will have to unbolt some bits of it and leave them behind. Back to Gateway (a bit cramped) and then back into the really cramped Orion for several days with your friends on you way back to Earth. SLS is limited to one flight per year with the possibility that lots of tax payers money will double the production rate. The good news is the ticket price will limit the length of the queue.
The fear used to be that the rush to the Moon would cause a flags and foot prints mission instead of a sustained exploration program. With $8B added to the bill I am not sure there will be money left over for flags.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
