I wouldn't buy and hold a PP - too much risk. Below average rewards (opportunity cost) and fails just when you need it to protect the most. In effect paying an insurance premium only to see the insurance fail when you need to claim. 1933, gold confiscated to immediately ramp up the price of gold (direct confiscation). 1970's/80's, high inflation, high yields, high taxes - (indirect confiscation). So no its not something I am doing myself - but its interesting to consider alternatives.
In a high yield, high inflation, high taxes (and no tax efficient space - as was generally the case back in the 70's/80's), paying a dividend and receiving a dividend (similar sized short and long holdings) is tax neutral, which is better than inflation 15%, yields 15%, less taxes (in the UK taxes on income rose to around 40% for basic rate (most common) taxpayer band during those years, such that 15% gross yield = 9% net yield (-6% real)).
Gold in gross real annualised gain terms from 1980 to end of 2011 was negative (-0.3% annualised). Gross nominal was around +3.1% annualised, growing $10,000 to $26,600 over those years, such that a $16,600 taxable 'profit' on nominal may have fallen due, compared to something that didn't even keep up with inflation. Worse still is if you compare over 1980 to 2000 i.e. before the up-run in gold (-7% annualised real)!
Boglehead philosophy of diverse, tax efficient is more time proven. Whilst maybe more volatile during the interim period, what matters more is the final outcome when you actually get to spend what you had been saving/investing for. Gaining more to later give back some but still be ahead is better than gaining less and then being clobbered when you need to claim but your insurance is declared null and void.