15 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

As I get older, and have kids, I really begin to think the Norwegians really have the right idea.

We had a labor revolution in this country back in the day. We fought for a 5 day, 40 hour work week. Why did we stop at that?

I know people that start jobs that don't offer any vacation for a year. I just can't understand the logic behind that.

I think the American work week is not a healthy thing. We're overworked, spending less time with family, less time excercising, less time relaxing, more money on consumption (more commuting, more fast food, more toys to keep the kids happy while you're out, etc.)

(Not to mention our pathetic parental leave policies...)

I don't know about the rest of American's, but give me 30, 40, or 50 hours a week, and I'll get the same amount of work done. ;o)

As I go further with my career, my goal is less raises, more vacation time.

15 Apr 2003 | Pete Baker said...

The fact that so many people are unemployed while so many more people work their asses off is insane. I would gladly give up a 25-33% of my salary for 25-33% more time of my own. And if I could find one more like minded person, that's enough money to hire another person and all of us could live happily ever after.

This is especially true when I think about how many of my hours spent working are actually productive, and not spent answering redundant emails and looking at design sites.

15 Apr 2003 | B said...

Someone's gotta pick up the slack for the Europeans.

15 Apr 2003 | fajalar said...

Tired of the way you work?

Fight Back!

60-70 hours a week it just way too addictive. Gives new meaning to the phrase, "I have no son/daughter!" I don't want to be like my father, but I sure am acting that way.

The problem is that most places it is not expected or required, but if you don't, you're not a "team player."

15 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

I think it's driven by a variety of factors: peer pressure, corporate downsizing (meaning that the people who are left have to do more work), the ubiquity of pagers and cellphones (which allow people to get used to the idea of working anyplace and anytime).

Peer pressure is probably the big one. I first felt it when I worked in the nonprofit world, which is full of people so committed to a cause that they think nothing of working 75 hour weeks for $20,000 a year. Some people even exhibit a degree of machismo about working long hours, although I tend to just feel sorry for them.

Part of the problem too is that our culture tends to equate effort with productivity. If you work efficiently enough to get your work done in 40 hours per week, you're seen as a slacker because your peers are putting in 60 hours--even if they're accomplishing no more than you are.

I recently switched from full- to part-time in order to regain some time for myself. I'm sure I'll still put in 75-hour weeks every now and then, but knowing that I can stop working after 30 hours (as long as my deadlines permit) is a big relief.

15 Apr 2003 | steve said...

JF, is everyone at 37signals working 33% more to make up for EK's departure?

15 Apr 2003 | Don Schenck said...

I feel like I don't work enough! I leave the house at 7:00 a.m. and get home at 6:00 p.m. and then feel guilty that I need to do more.

*sigh*

15 Apr 2003 | JF said...

I happen to enjoy working. Sometimes I wish I could work more, other times less. But I don't think working a lot is any worse than not working much. Some people enjoy it more than thei do vacation time. IMHO, it's really up to the individual.

15 Apr 2003 | p8 said...

There is only so much you can do on a day. No one is Superman. I have heard from people who switched from 8 hour workdays to 9 hour workdays they only did more work in the beginning and eventually did the same amount of work in 9 hours as they did in 8.

15 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

My brother's boss went to MIT, and when he got a job at some firm in Palo Alto he was bored to death because everyone was just working 40-50 hours a week. So he quit and started his own company and now works 12-hour days, 7 days a week, and loves it. I agree with JF, it's up to the individual. If you love your work, no problem. If you don't, or if you have a family, a hobby, or other things to occupy your time, you'll probably resent having to work long days and weekends.

15 Apr 2003 | benry said...

without a doubt the US is missing it. all of my canadian friends that now work down in the US complain frequently of the lack of statutory holidays (there are less than in Canada), the long work hours, the frequent demands by senior managers to stay later and work harder. it's not that this does not happen in Europe or other countries it is just that they have realized that happy employees breed better productivity, company loyalty and in the end better lives.

15 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

> There is only so much you can do on a day.

EXCELLENT point. I'd say I'm good for a good 3 hours in the morning and 3 after lunch. And that's about it. The other few hours are spend staring at the wall.

I'd really love to see a push towards a 30 hour work week.

As for JF and Hurley's comments about 'liking' the work, that's a valid point. Do note in the two examples, though, that these people liked the long hours because it was THEIR company. That makes all the difference in the world. Working for someone else is just that. It's just a thing you have to do 40 hours a week so that you can enjoy what time is left in the week with your family.

15 Apr 2003 | JF said...

EXCELLENT point. I'd say I'm good for a good 3 hours in the morning and 3 after lunch. And that's about it. The other few hours are spend staring at the wall.

Then maybe you should just be paid for a 6 hour day instead. Would you be OK with that? Why should your employer pay for you to stare at the wall?

15 Apr 2003 | mick said...

Even with a 35 hour work week France's unemployment rate is a disaster, as is Europe's economy as a whole.

15 Apr 2003 | said...

Don't forget those who take work home and telecommute for no extra pay because they have computers at home. Off the record unpaid overtime does wonders for the productivity figures.

15 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Working for someone else is just that. It's just a thing you have to do 40 hours a week so that you can enjoy what time is left in the week with your family.

Well, I wouldn't go that far. I've had a couple of fantastic jobs working for great organizations, but I hated the five years I spent working for myself. I'm my own worst boss.

15 Apr 2003 | Benjy said...

So let me get this straight... they make better cars, eat better food, drink better beer, have more beautiful women, they have topless beaches, AND they work 9 weeks a year less than we do! Why aren't we all moving over there!

15 Apr 2003 | p8 said...

"The other few hours are spend staring at the wall."

And posting at SVN. ;)

15 Apr 2003 | Cam said...

So let me get this straight... they make better cars, eat better food, drink better beer, have more beautiful women, they have topless beaches, AND they work 9 weeks a year less than we do! Why aren't we all moving over there!

All companies hiring in nations that belong to the EU are required by law to give preference to a EU native over a foreigner. If you don't have a European passport, your chances of landing that job in Europe are much more slim than a native candidate.

In Russia, it is common practice for employers to withhold employees' slaries for several months as a way to improve cash reserves. I have friends there who have been working for the same company for years but whose salaries for the past several months have not yet been paid becuase the company is "having financial troubles." it's also common for Russian companies to expect you to work 10 and 12 hour days, 6 days a week.

15 Apr 2003 | Fish Sauce said...

My father does lots work with workers compensation (esp. regarding working conditions) and whatnot, and just about every study shows that as the work week goes beyond a certain number of hours, productivity falls drastically. Dropping from a ten hour work day to a seven hour work day often leads to an increase in productivity. With more rest and personal down time, workers are generally happier, which generally leads to better productivity.

15 Apr 2003 | Josh Penrod said...

Where are the Europeans on this thread? Come on guys--chime in here.

Anyone out there who has worked both places?

15 Apr 2003 | Steven Garrity said...

Your post (and others) got me thinking, the result of which was this post: Calling all economists: Is efficiency a good thing?

15 Apr 2003 | Steve said...

I've worked both places. Overall, I prefer the European attitude toward work being a part of life, not life itself. But it's part of a larger cultural issue. Europeans don't approach things as rushed and harried and feeling a need to constantly be doing something like Americans do. A perfect example is dinner: most American restaurants try to push you in and out as quickly as possible so they can turn over more tables. Most European restauarants assume only a couple seatings a night, and encourage lingering and a leisurely evening with friends.

The people I worked with in Germany worked hard and took great pride in what they did. But they also recognized that a job was what you did in order to have money to do other things. It wasn't who you were.

15 Apr 2003 | Cade Roux said...

Well, the Europeans simply don't get as much done, and if you've ever tried to complete a project with them when they happen to have their six-week holiday scheduled in the middle of the project, forget it. Prices there are higher and the cost of living is greater. I lived in England for eight years, but a certain amount of sacrifice and dedication to your work are something I think are necessary - and six-week vacations don't cut it in the software industry.

15 Apr 2003 | ~bc said...

I agree: Americans are very overworked, and the reason why is that it's woven into our culture. Freetime is not a virtue. On the other hand, I'm only working part-time (can't find appropriate full-time work) and clamoring for more hours. I have no benefits, insurance, etc. It's a paradox: recession + overworked employed people + lots of smart, employable people unemployed. I think the key is that business is terminally short sited. It makes "good sense" in the short term to simply run employees into the ground for little pay, and then replace them with another well-qualified, desperate-to-be-employed soul (need one? get my info here!). Never have to pay bonuses, give raises, because people are expendable. And that's the conservative, Wall Street mentality. And the key to what wrong with America. Fix that, and lots of other things (crime down, less domestic issues, less health/stress /smoking and alcohol issues, kids behave because they have participatory parents) fall into line. Notice all of those (with the exception of smoking--I could be wrong here) are lower in Europe? Let's not forget more time for consumption and a boon to the travel industry!

16 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

A telling contrast I've noted between Europeans and Americans: when an American meets someone at a party or private supper, one of the first questions he or she asks is, "so, what do you do for a living?" The Europeans I've met hardly ever ask that question, or if they do it comes up much later in the conversation.

16 Apr 2003 | Max said...

this just reminds me of the saying 'europeans work to live, americans live to work'

16 Apr 2003 | Mr. Nosuch said...

Can't comment... gotta get back to work.

16 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

> Then maybe you should just be paid for a
> 6 hour day instead. Would you be OK with that?

Uhh...yea...like I said, I'm for a shorter work week.

> Why should your employer pay for you to stare at the wall?

Well, there is a pervasive mentality in management that it's not important how much work you actually do, or how important that work actually is, but rather that you work for 40 hours.

I'd say Americans are *not* very productive at work. I see a lot of wasted time in most everyone's job whether that be meaningless paper shuffling, pointless meetings, fake 'emergency's'...that type of thing.

Fish/Steve...good points.

> I think the key is that business is terminally short sited.

Yep.

16 Apr 2003 | B said...

Uhh...yea...like I said, I'm for a shorter work week

JF asked you if you'd be for less pay for less work, not if you just want to work less.

I think the key is that business is terminally short sited

Sigh. Go start your own and you'll understand.

16 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

JF asked you if you'd be for less pay for less work, not if you just want to work less.

Yes. How many times do I need to say that?

That said, note that the amount of work doesn't really equate to salary. There are executives getting 6 figures to play golf and manual laborers getting minimum wage to do heavy work.

The big problem, of course, is that most companies don't want to bother giving you benefits if you're not putting in the token 40 hours.

Sigh. Go start your own and you'll understand.

Understand what? That there's something magic to the required 'be at work for 40 hours' logic?

I've been at companies that stick to the 40 hour work week thing, and I've been at companies that do the 'just get your work done' thing. The latter is always a more relaxing environment, even at those times you're putting in over 40 hours.

There seems to be an American 'pride' thing going on with the 40+ hour work week. Why spend more of your week at work than with your family/friends/relaxing/enjoying life?

16 Apr 2003 | B said...

There are executives getting 6 figures to play golf

Unreal. Your perspective is so warped. Execs have to make tough decisions that can affect thousands and thousands. That's as hard as any work you'll find. Sometimes they're dead wrong or crooked (Enron, etc.), but their vision, strategy, policy, support, and guidence is what allows everyone else to do their job, to collect a paycheck, and achieve much more than they could on their own.

manual laborers getting minimum wage to do heavy work.

So what? First off, what do you mean by "heavy work" anyway? And, why should someone be paid more because the work is "heavy?"

16 Apr 2003 | Hagbard Celine said...

"No one ever lay on their death bed and thought 'I should have spent more time at the office.'"
- someone smarter than me

16 Apr 2003 | alisha said...

The word "Europeans" often doesnt fit: Germans, Brits, Italians and French couldnt be more different from eachother. The cultural/mentality differences are the biggest reasons for (international) project failures.

Germans have 6 weeks vacation a year - but they arent allowed to take them all at once. They also have all the religious hoildays. What Ive noticed more than anything else since being here is a balance of wealth. Our social system and wage laws keep the gap relatively small between rich and poor. Actually its a dream to work here as an employee but this system is rapidly falling apart. Germanys social system and employment laws are outdated and flawed at the core. Unemployment is rising and growth is slowing. Employees are over-protected here if you ask me.

I do agree that germans have more relaxed, enjoyable lifestyles because of the labor laws, but also because of the mentality. Americans are better at being competitive and going after what they really want and believe in (inmo).
---
"Well, the Europeans simply don't get as much done..."
---
which countries are you speaking of?

16 Apr 2003 | ~bc said...

"so, what do you do for a living?" The Europeans I've met hardly ever ask that question

I understand that, in England at least, that asking someone that question is akin to asking someone you've just met "so, how much money do you make?" in the States.

And, why should someone be paid more because the work is "heavy?"

Would you rather sit in an office and make "important decisions" all day for 6 figures, or clean toilets for minimum wage, sans health care? Obviously, manual labor takes a greater toll on one's body, and soul. An exception, of course would be someone like a stone worker, whose work is both heavy, yet well paid for their craftmanship and can be rewarding in an artisan kind of way. Alas, there are many more janitors than craftsmen. And for good reason. We couldn't have the executive washroom soiled, now could we?

Never the less, I'd rather make "important decisions" in a cozy $1000 leather chair and be artistic in my ample spare time...

16 Apr 2003 | fajalar said...

Unreal. Your perspective is so warped. Execs have to make tough decisions that can affect thousands and thousands.

Well, I would say that most execs do make decisions, but the data/info to make the decision is gathered by the person making 30-60K a year. They say, "Give me a number," or "Give me the bottom line." They rely on the underlings to come up with the decision, they are just the ones that allow it to happen. Not sure how Darrel's perspective is warped.

Right now I work for a boss that is in the "get your work done and if I don't hear anything bad about you, you can make your own hours." I used to work for a boss that was a, "Get here at 7, lunch at noon, back at 12:30, and you can leave at 3:15," but I was expected to work more.

Same company, different bosses. I get a base salary, but I also get paid OT. And I do stare at the walls sometimes. And sometimes I don't charge for the OT I put in. The staring at walls usually come about because too many people are required to make a decision. "I'll get back to you on that." So I wait for them to get back to me.

I've also had 2 periods of over 2 months with no projects to work on. So I had to come in and sit at my desk and surf the Web. And get paid a thousand a week to do it. The response from my boss... "Project work is slow right now, something will come up."

Business is terminally short-sighted. In the software industry, businesses should only employ SMEs, and outsource the actual work. That way they don't pay people when there is nothing to do. That said, I like me job and would like to keep it. :)

Crap, I typed too much. Back to designing app.

16 Apr 2003 | MrBlank said...

How do they career council high school students in Europe? In my school, it was always engrained into my head that I had to get good grades and go to college to get the perfect job that Ill LOVE doing so I can do it till I retire. I if I didnt do that stuff then I would end up being some janitor and a failed human being. What a load of crap!

I have a friend who is a fantastic designer and he works as a janitor. At first, when he told me about his new job, I thought he was joking. He doesnt whore out his creativity to some company. He saves it for his projects with local bands and the local music scene. ( An article about him here.) He puts in his time at work so he can afford to do what he loves. You dont have to love your job, love your life. He inspires me.

16 Apr 2003 | malross said...

I understand that, in England at least, that asking someone that question is akin to asking someone you've just met "so, how much money do you make?" in the States.

If by that you mean it's frowned upon, you'd be wrong.

I was surprised when hurley#1 made that statement in the first place. Asking what you do for a living is, I would've thought, pretty universal. When you meet someone new, you're looking for common ground. Work might be one area, then there's leisure interests, television (god help us) and, if all else fails, the weather. ;) I don't think us Brits are any different to anyone else in the smalltalk stakes.

(Apologies for the boring, non-controversial response. :)

16 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

And, why should someone be paid more because the work is "heavy?"

I think we're arguing the same thing. There is no direct correlation in terms of 'amount of work' to salary. Yea, making a decision is hard. So is working on the factory floor.

Some people don't do a lot during a 40 hour week, some people do a lot. What's weird is that we're focusing on the 40 hours part of the equation...not the amount of work people accomplish or how they go about accomplishing it.

I have a friend who is a fantastic designer and he works as a janitor.

I think a problem with a lot of our jobs is that we're either doing hard physical labor for 40 hours, or we're doing hard mental labor for 40 hours. There's no balance.

I need a job title of web designer/grounds keeper. Get designers block...go mow the lawn. Too hot today? Go update that web site...

When you meet someone new, you're looking for common ground. Work might be one area, then there's leisure interests, television (god help us) and, if all else fails, the weather.

Notice that you mentioned 'work' as being the first option for finding common ground. Why is that? ;o)

16 Apr 2003 | alisha said...

B- Halarious how you fling insults and have no facts or figures to back up your rancid tuna spurts. youre better than olSaeed al-Sahaf anyday!

16 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

was surprised when hurley#1 made that statement in the first place. Asking what you do for a living is, I would've thought, pretty universal.

Maybe it's more of a continental European thing than a British thing (I don't think of Brits as being Europeans, and I don't think many Brits do either!). Other than the UK and Ireland I've only been to France, Switzerland, and Norway, but I spent several weeks in each of those countries and met lots of people, and I don't think any of them asked me what I did for work until after we'd known each other a while. That's also generally been my experience with Europeans whom I've met in the US and Canada.

16 Apr 2003 | Steve said...

There's no question that there's a lot of short-sightedness going on in business ("business" being a broad, sweeping, generalized term covering all of businesses). Too much focus on meeting this quarter's numbers. Executives more focused on doing what they need to do to get their bonus and stock options this year. Not a lot of focus on what's good for companies from a long-term perspective.

I've worked next to "executives" in the last couple companies I've been with, and my dad has been one. There's nothing mystical and magical about what they do. Just like any other jobs, some of them do it well and are able to make changes and respond to changing conditions and set direction and do the things that are expected of executives. Others are thoroughly incompetent, or focused only on short-term gains. What they do is not generally worth the enormous premiums often attached to the position. They do deserve more, certainly, especially becauase corporate officers can be held personally liable for certain things.

Drifting the topic a bit, one of the short-term focus issues that has me concerned is the ever-present effort to reduce labor costs by sending work overseas. It's been happening in manufacturing for years, but it's now happening with professional jobs - customer service, programming, architecture, even financial analysis. The short-sightedness is that you have to have customers to buy your products and services, and they need to have jobs that pay them decent money to spend on those goods and services. Who's going to be left as customers when business gets done shifting all the jobs elsewhere?

16 Apr 2003 | JF said...

There's no question that there's a lot of short-sightedness going on in business ("business" being a broad, sweeping, generalized term covering all of businesses). Too much focus on meeting this quarter's numbers.

Ahhh, but they're just responding to all the non-execs out there...The stockholders. The market. The demands of the public to see returns on their investment. They are driven to be short-sighted by the very people who complain about them being short-sighted. Actions and demands have consequences. You can't have it all, Mr. and Mrs. Public.

16 Apr 2003 | Steve said...

Ahhh, but they're just responding to all the non-execs out there...The stockholders. The market. The demands of the public to see returns on their investment.

Good point, and definitely a key driver. Althought I'd quibble and say that it's driven more by the professional and institutional investors rather than Mr and Mrs Public.

Even with that demand, some companies have started saying "screw this" with regard to the endless focus on short-term numbers, and said they'll no longer do quarterly forecasts and do what's required by law - the quarterly reports. I applaud them for that, and for saying that it's more important to run the business well for long-term viability rather than waste time tending to demanding investors.

16 Apr 2003 | sw said...

we need to focus on what life is really about, they have it right! we need to stop chasing money and start pursuing happiness.

16 Apr 2003 | paul said...

another interesting link about the differences between american and european work eithics.

16 Apr 2003 | hurley#1 said...

Nice piece. But this quote scares me:

Some experts believe that legislation to limit the workweek, even to 40 hours, for all employees (including salaried or "exempt" workers) is a necessary next step.

I think education's a better approach than legislation.

16 Apr 2003 | ~bc said...

England at least...like "so, how much money do you make?"
If by that you mean it's frowned upon, you'd be wrong.

Well, its hard for me to fight a Brit on this, but thinking back on it I believe I picked that up in an article that compared cultural differences between Brits and us "colonists." It mentioned things like personal distance, dental hygene, and other random things. I've been to England, but I was in high school at the time so I didn't have a whole lot of people asking me what I did for a living, and I would certainly agree we still have a great deal in common. I also seem to recall it was written by a Brit living in the States. Go figure. Anyhow, we all work too much. But I wish I worked more. So I could complain that I worked too much.

16 Apr 2003 | MrAnonymous said...

As a college student, I put in 20 hours of class and 35 hours of work a week. It gets to be a little crazy, but I can do homework at my job, so it balances out. I personally don't have a problem with the 40 hour work week. I think we should keep it at 40 hours. I mean, if you come home after work instead of going to the bar, you've got plenty of family time available.

17 Apr 2003 | alisha said...

I think the perception of time is a very good point. Many of my american friends say they do relax and enjoy thier free time. But they are quite "hectic" compared to my german friends (Im comparing people in large cities). They (Americans) spend less time on one thing, and squeeze more into a day. They also consume much more, which takes more time.

17 Apr 2003 | p8 said...

Recent dutch research (is in dutch) shows a big increase in tiredness complaints of the dutch population in the last 15 years. Men (from 24% to 33%). Women (from 38% to 50%).

According to the study:
"Work itself doesn't seem to be linked with the increase. But the constant relation with difficult external situations like a one-parent family, taking care of the kids combined with payed work (for women), living in the big city and lack of social support, suggests that tiredness is definitely a symptom of a 'hard life' and not just a psychological problem.

Society seems to keep increasing it's demands, and perhaps people keep demanding more from themselves to fit the ideal, created by society, of a good and productive life ."

17 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

I mean, if you come home after work instead of going to the bar, you've got plenty of family time available.

I take it you don't have kids yet, eh?

17 Apr 2003 | MrAnonymous said...

I take it you don't have kids yet, eh?

No I don't, but I don't drink either... Give me a few years and I might empathize.

17 Apr 2003 | Darrel said...

Give me a few years and I might empathize.

Oops. I think my comment may have come across wrong. ;o)

Before having kids, I didn't mind 40 hours a week as much. But once they came along, I realized how precious time is with a young child. After you put in your morning routine, 8+ hours of work, commuting, grabbing dinner, etc. you are maybe left with 2 hours of day to spend with your child, and if you're lucky, maybe another 2 to get in time with the spouse, shopping, housework, relaxing, volunteering, excercising, etc.

And yea, if you try to throw in some time for the bar, well, good luck. ;)

It does get hectic.

17 Apr 2003 | Gray said...

I second that. My first web job was a "real" job, bennies, vacation, not much pay (I'm in the midwest) but I WAS able to get Peet's Coffee as one of my perks, which I considered quite an achievement.

I was all set to live the American Dream, working as lead designer for this little ISP (very UserFriendly) when the realities of commuting, of outside research to stay current, and the toll it would take on my kids became evident. In fact, because they are with their Mom on weekends, it meant I had NO time with the kids other than the hour or so between when I got home and when they went to bed--time when I was usually too tired to do anything.

So I quit, and started my own company (this was '98, and it still seemed like a good idea). It's been a hellacious struggle, and I'm still living on the ragged edge of solvency...and I end up working 60+ hours a week.

Difference being, I make my own hours (Yes, being self-employed is great, you get to pick out which 23 hours a day you want to work...). This means I can take time out in the middle of the day and visit my kids at school...I can do the grocery shopping, etc during the day when the crowds are less...and I can decide to take a day off if I feel I need to.

Not that I do. No such thing as a paid vacation...but I've got a laptop, so there are lots of "working" vacations. No health benefits...so I don't get sick (yes, I know I'm very lucky). But I'm one of those that does get to do work they love, and I wouldn't trade this for the 9-5 no matter how gold the handcuffs.

17 Apr 2003 | MrAnonymous said...

I guess what makes it worse...I have a friend who works a 40 hour week, but commutes over an hour...which is just insane, in my opinion. And he has three kids. And he's been commuting like this for several years. That's not for me.

18 Apr 2003 | Luke Andrews said...

I think it's telling that this post about work has received more comments than the earlier post about sex. Hmm...where are our priorities?

18 Apr 2003 | brian said...

"Then maybe you should just be paid for a 6 hour day instead. Would you be OK with that? Why should your employer pay for you to stare at the wall?"

fair enough. but why should I work 50-60 hours a week for a 40 hour salary. I wouldn't mind so much if we got paid for overtime.

23 Apr 2003 | Don Schenck said...

I'm self-employed, and only work half days!

Seven to seven :-)

14 Jan 2004 | Ken said...

Geschenke - Geburtstagsgeschenke - Geschenkideen