[decebalus1]

Not really. For example UAE is on the list as a top destination for expats. However, laborers from poor countries would probably have a different view on things in terms of career advancement or cultural integration. They're not permanent. I mean if your 'owner' holds your passport hostage you're more permanent than temporary. They're not really 'expats' in the context of the 'study'.

[refurb]

Are you arguing foreign workers in UAE are "immigrants"? They aren't.

And sure, lower income foreign workers might have it worse than rich foreign workers, but they still come for the benefits.

[decebalus1]

> Are you arguing foreign workers in UAE are "immigrants"? They aren't.

No, I'm saying exactly the opposite. They aren't, they're non-immigrant temporary workers, thus technically 'expats'. However, they're more often referred to as 'migrant workers' and this report, for example, does not include them.

Another example is Mexico. There are a couple hundred thousand Americans living and working in Mexico. They're considered expats. But a Mexican temporary visa holder is considered either a migrant worker or a legal alien.

[refurb]

I mean they are "expats". Poorly paid expats, but expats none the less.

[eesmith]

The argument is that by your definition temporary foreign workers in the UAE are expats, since they are not immigrants.

This report, however, does not appear to include them in their survey, suggesting a mismatch between your definition, and that used by an organization which claims to be "the largest global expat network" with "4.5 million members."

Indeed, you'll be hard pressed to find poor temporary workers from less developed described as "expats".

For example, I've noticed few people refer to the ~200K low-skilled temporary Mexican laborers in the US under the H-2A visa as "expats", even though they fit your definition.

I've further noticed that "illegal immigrant" is used even for people who intend only temporary residence in the destination country.