wat0n wrote:
Functionally illiterate people often count as "literate" in a binary (literate-not literate) definition. Of course that very concept exists precisely because more developed countries need to distinguish between a person who literally can't read and a person who can read but not understand whatever he's reading.
Which varies from country to country.
In the 1970s, much of rural New England had a literacy rate of 70% (or less), and the standards of what constituted literacy were low at the time. I had a job that had me working in small towns, and I got to see it up close.
Back then, the Manchester Union Leader was the big NH paper. They got businesses to put their paper out on the sidewalk so everyone would see them. The lunatic that owned it, Loeb, had his editorial on the front page. The point of the editorial would be in red ink, again, so you couldn't miss it. Nuke Hanoi was one of his favorites. There were a lot of marginally literate guys that loved it.
Even in cities, the poor areas often have wretched schools.
So, sure, we have a high literacy rate, just don't kick the tires...