Challenging reply. Are we all then using freezers from instinct? We have not all created it but I would say we "consciously" decided to buy one. Do common behaviors become instinct? What is the difference between instinct and social norms? Also diversity may exist within the same class of instinctive expression (e.g. fear could mean running away or freezing.)
Your distinction between conscious and instinctive is already based on the assumption of a definition for consciousness. What place does each one come from?
At this point we are already making assumptions about the validity of distinction between conscious action and instinct. Is conscious action an instinct? Where do we cross that line? I am afraid the definition is recursive. Thus we are ascertaining the consciousness of the action by assuming/accepting/defining the consciousness of the actor based on the lack of instinctive behavior!
I will disagree with the "It is natural evolution of the human being..." part. Not that it is not true, but it conveys the wrong message. Cancer is a natural evolution too, but evolution of the human being is different than evolution of the human kind. I myself have been diagnosed with Aspergers' and, while I appreciate the diversity of my thought process, I can understand why people with the same condition might feel inclined to clip the unconventional aspects of their self. The human kind has evolved as a social organisation and participation in the club is somehow strict. Medication or meditation, it still is an attempt to join the club. And it is the fact that you accept the club's peace interpretation that leads you to either. That said, I would rather meditation to medication too. Still, that depends on the severity of the case. As an Aspergers' with an Autistic son, if there was medication for my son I would surely try it. Normality is a bliss. Sometimes being a tree in the middle of the desert is not better than being a sand grain.
If they are monitored and if unauthorized access is prevented by "harsh discipline". then they are not protected. Protection is proactive not reactive.
500 euros is not crazy. It is the normal first job wage in Greece and the way things are going will be the normal in many European countries. I do not think the reason people do not join is the year contract. The days of severance payments are long gone. The commuting is more plausible given the high cost of fuel. So you should consider work from home arrangements. As for creativity, I think it is something that is special in all countries. Your average person, including me, does not have the courage to be creative (in the sense of creative you are employing.) Entrepreneurship is an exclusive club everywhere, and if you look I am sure you can find its members in every country, including the poor countries you mention.
Coming from Greece and currently working in Australia, I see what you mean. Nevertheless, even if there is opportunity for creation there is no such opportunity for survival. When you are in a market with shallow liquidity, the best intentions will not get you far. The near-shoring of course (absorbing liquidity from outside your country) is a potential solution, an attractive one too, but there are significant obstacles still. E.g. the fact that Northerners have attributed all woes to the mentality of Southerners is such an obstacle.
Therefore, you may find opportunities as a Dutch with Portuguese or Spanish employees but I would not expect the same access to market for a purely Greek, Spanish or Portuguese entrepreneur. I assure you that as a Greek I hear derogatory comments even by people who can see and witness the quality of my work. The best case scenario is when they consider me an exception amongst the Greeks. I am not one.
Accusing those who leave that they do it selfishly is not very nice. I can assume you selfishly want the best developers (those who can find work abroad) work for the 500 euros or whatever you offer. It is a crisis and the best anyone can make of it is to survive and in the process work to get the necessary experiences to go back when the conditions are better.
It is a crisis, and the 200-300 euro slavery northerners envision for us is not the solution. It is the problem. If as the "Dean" told you, people avoided risk, they would not risk moving either. The grass is not greener. The money is more. After all, EU is supposedly encouraging mobility. It is a free market, or is it not? Are only companies supposed to move?