That is such a specious argument. Of course we cannot find a trillion dollars of fed "worker" salary to cut. But, in the final analysis, the job of the govt is to spend our tax money. With fewer people, they cannot spend as much. If you cut the fed labor force by half (excluding military), I'd wager fed spending would go down by 35% to 40%. There has to be a multiplier at work here; maybe not 1, but certainly greater than 0.
So, yes, you CAN balance the budget on the backs of federal employees.
We can cut the military down greatly also. Our armed forces serve to subsidize the welfare states of our allies all over the globe. The nation will not long accept defending nations who have more robust social safety nets than we have.
One of the ‘practices’ in our government agencies is that the more people you have under you, the more you must be paid.
That is why they create so many positions and have so much dead wood.
The other ‘practice’ is that if you don’t spend your entire budget AND MORE, your budget will be cut. At the end of the fiscal year, they have a ‘buying’ spree where everyone orders junk they don’t really need, to ensure that they go ‘over budget’.