CC wrote: HARP is/was a way to stimulate the economy that doesn't cost the taxpayer anything if implemented properly.

Dwdonhoff wrote: Does the taxpayer suffer when incapable borrowers are propped up & extended before their collapse?

I said "...if implemented properly." What's "incapable" about a borrower who, through no fault of his own but because of bank shenanigans is upside down on his mortgage yet current in the payments?

"Implemented properly" means that banks, of their own volition, should refinance these borrowers. It would be quid pro quo for being bailed out by the taxpayers in spite of their shenanigans. Thousands of American homeowners, despite being current in their payments, are paying thousands more annually in interest because they choose to honor their contract with the bank. Something's not right with that picture.

In other words, the banks should have come up with their own HARP program, not the government.