Unfortunately for you, a spelling change in English is inconceivable. It would call for a unanimous decision in the major English-speaking countries. Moreover, even if it happened, it wouldn't make things easier: instead of just one way to spell a word, people would have to learn two ways to be able to understand pre-spelling reform texts. Texts written in English over hundreds of years wouldn't cease to exist overnight and all public signs and notices put on the walls all over the world wouldn't disappear. In other words, the language has been around for too long.
Also, if spelling reflected pronunciation more closely, there would be be at least three spellings for
garage and eight for
Byzantine. Spelling differences between the various varieties of English would increase dramatically, there would be general confusion at newspapers and publishing houses and writing and reading English would slow down considerably. English is mixed up enough as it is without total anarchy in spelling.
A much better idea might be to simply start accepting some spellings that are usually considered wrong:
recieve,
beleive,
indite to mean 'indict' etc. Even that is unlikely to happen. English spelling has not undergone major changes in 300 years. In the days of Old English, before the printing press was invented, a person could spell a word in two ways without paying much attention to it. No more.
Tuanle says English is difficult for him (her?). The difficulty arises from the fact that his/her native language isn't related to the Germanic languages. English is very easy for a German because German is one of the languages English is derived from. In fact Old English is syntactically essentially the same as modern German. From this point of view,
all languages can be said to be either easy or difficult for some.
Learning my native language would also be difficult for Tuanle although it is very easy for an Estonian. Finnish and Estonian are both Finno-Ugric languages and thus very closely related. The grammar would present you with some difficulties. Just to give you an example, I'll write some English sentences and the Finnish equivalent of the word
new in those sentences. As these are illustrative examples, they don't necessarily make much sense.
This is a new box. uusi
These are new boxes. uusia
These are the new boxes. uudet
I need a new box. uuden
What's the color of the new boxes? uusien
What's in the new box? uudessa
What's in the new boxes? uusissa
It came out of the new box. uudesta
They came out of the new boxes. uusista
It ran into the new box. uuteen
They ran into the new boxes. uusiin
It's sitting on the new box. uudella
They are sitting on the new boxes. uusilla
I don't expect much of the new box. uudelta
I don't expect much of the new boxes. uusilta
Don't say it to the new box. uudelle
Don't say it to the new boxes. uusille
I'll change it into a new box. uudeksi
I'll change them into new boxes. uusiksi
Of course you need a different inflection of the word in all the above cases if you use the comparative (newer) or the superlative (the newest). Aren't you glad you have never had to learn a grammatically complicated language?
Cheers
CB