Well you follow Ron Swanson's example: hoard as much gold as you can, bury it at an undisclosed location, and then move in the woods and live off the land in a cabin.
Most people cant cook wild herbs or grow them for that matter, cant hunt well, dont know how to preserve food so it wont spoil. Dont have carpentry skills, gold gives zero help with any of those things. Plain steel or iron or a bit of flint even would rate as more valuable.
What we can say is gold is extremely useful as an exchangeable reliable non degradable store of value. Ron Swanson is awesome and skilled but he has no use for gold stuck out in the woods, as he is a libertarian I think he'd acknowledge value is determined from production mainly. In the modern world we trade everything across the world so we have become alien to the source of the products we use everyday, we have no choice now and the woods or hoarding wealth would cause the nation to starve.
One of the mistakes in the 1930's was to close off or reduce drastically international trade so its kind of a real problem even past hypothetical gold hoarding. (lost trade causes costs to be raised for both the seller and buyer of those goods I think)
Same applies to bitcoin, actually the people who do nothing with it and take no part in bitcoin trading or exchanging are not helping building value at all. If all people did this, the value would be zero whereas if all people do a useful or unique production and sale in bitcoin the value can be considerable. The only time hoarders are useful is when they spend or when they earn the original gold or bitcoin, if they earn and produce everyday then I wont argue because that is useful but if stuck in the woods its not helping anyone else so Ron Swanson hopefully wouldnt do this :p
tl;dr Swanson is a trader not a hoarder (from my brief viewing of his tv series)
