Factually speaking, where did the $15 billion that the post office has taken out on loan from the US Treasury come from, if not taxpayers?
Only the postal workers union would make such an absurd statement.
Did you have anything to factual to add here or did you forget this is GQ and not GD? 
Perhaps you could start with a cite that explains something about the alleged loan…?
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_23/b4231060885070_page_2.htm
Note the article was published in May of this year.
The meaning of the statement, “The Post Office is not supported by taxpayers” is that its revenue is larger than its current expenses, salaries, and reasonable funding for its pension benefits. It’s current fiscal problems stem from a 2006 congressional mandate that it pre-fund its retiree health benefits for the next 75 years, which is not a typical expense for this kind of business.
It would be like if congress enacted a law saying that you had to pay a billion dollars, and then turned around and called you a spendthrift for being so ridiculously in debt.
Incorrect.
The 2010 annual report states losses from expenses exceeding revenues by $8.3 billion. The prefunding payment of the pension plan was approximately $5.6 billion, as stated in the same report. The still leaves a $2.7 billion loss for 2010.
Additionally, you’ll note capital contributions from the government of $3.6 billion. I’m curious why the government is contributing capital if the post office is not taxpayer supported.
http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/financials/annual-reports/fy2010.pdf