ACMS
The problem with your point is that you assume, like many others, that the officer in question WANTS to work past the age of 55.
SO here's what your proposing if I'm not mistaken.
I will need to work an extra "however-many" years to offset the money I lose in delayed command.
Why would anyone want that?
Please don't mistake my argument. I realise that 55 creeps up on all of us faster than most of us would like and I also agree that 55 is a young age to retire.
But do you not see that it only benefits the guys approaching 55? There is 0 benefit to the guy with the delayed command.