This paper is a joke. It only looks at the S&P futures. If I added liquidity in SPY or any of the other S&P ETF, hedged my exposure by removing liquidity in the futures, they would consider me an 'aggressive' trader.

They're missing 90% of the picture.

It is an ecosystem, of course traders with fast computers would try to fill all the niches they can. Take a look at a broader picture: http://www-rcf.usc.edu/~lharris/ACROBAT/Zerosum.pdf

Is suspect those in "Panel C: Losers who expect to profit from trading but will not" are complaining the most.

You're citing a very old paper that makes no mention of HFT? Not sure I follow the reasoning for the citation.

No one is saying that speculative traders don't serve a function in the market place. However you said "HFT serves the same purpose that human Market Makers and Specialists" when it has been proven they don't. HFT want you to believe that they serve some altruistic purpose to the marketplace to legitimize their existence. The truth is that HFT serves as a quasi-tax on each and every share traded because to execute a trade in today's marketplace non-HFT volume almost invariably passes through the hands of HFT volume thereby shaving pennies of profit off each trade.