I am not sure what "net cash income" is, i beleive that excludes investment/depreciation in the farm for machinery and buildings. Other components of the discussion are listed here from a stats can website:
Net cash income of farm businesses is derived by subtracting operating expenses from farm cash receipts. It represents the amount of cash generated by the farm business that is available for debt repayment, investment or withdrawal by the operators.
Realized net income of farm businesses is derived by subtracting depreciation and adding income-in-kind to net cash income. It represents the financial flows, both cash and non-cash, attributable to the farm businesses, similar to an income statement. It represents the net income from transactions in a given year in that it includes the sale of commodities regardless of the year they were produced.
Total net income measures the financial flows and stock changes of farm businesses (net cash income minus depreciation plus income-in-kind and value of inventory change). It represents the return to owner's equity, unpaid labour, management and risk. Total net income values agriculture economic production during the year that the agricultural goods were produced.
Net farm income is of interest to farmers, and their organizations, governments, financial institutions, the agri-food industry and the public. The numbers are used to assess the state of the agricultural industry and to form the basis of various policy options. The primary reason for compiling farm cash receipts is to estimate, on a provincial basis, the agriculture sector's contribution to gross domestic product. Estimates of farm income are published in the Canadian System of National Accounts as farm income contributes to the economic production and wealth of Canada.
As typical of reporting these days an author splashes a statistic in an article without saying how it is relevant or to be understood.
I remember reading a stats Can statistic that says xxxx number of people live below the poverty line and the number increases yearly. Turns out they get their data from yearly reported income on tax returns and so the 58 year old retired couple spending six months a year in Arizona with no income adds to the number living below the poverty line.
Anyway, if you dont look deeply into "statistics" being thrown around to understand their true meaning then there is no point getting worked up about them.
The numbers dont lie but people lie with the numbers.
