I was suggesting (and I still insist) that the writer had made a slip of pen or keystroke; and it's obviously the case, even in consideration of what you say. Your statements are valid, but do not invalidate mine in any way. Point blank: if gold's price rises, it takes more dollars to buy it -- no ifs ands or buts. The only possible exception would be if you were doing an apples and oranges thing in which someone said "gold is rising against the peso" (for example), because the peso has radically fallen, even more so, against the dollar, while gold was simultaneously falling vs. the dollar. Now that's confusing, but it is the only way you could say gold has risen in value (albeit against someone else's currency), yet it doesn't take more dollars to buy it.
I agree. I do think the writer made a mistake in the language, but I know what he was trying to get at.