In all fairness, I think I overstated Brooks’ animosity toward hedge-fund guys in that last post. Previous columns indicate that he gets the service they provide, but that he thinks they are overcompensated, or perhaps compensated in the wrong way. Still, his implication in today’s column (in which he compares them unfavorably to Bill Gates) is that they contribute nothing of value to society. Why would he write something like this when he knows better?