"Would it not be easier if words were spelled phonetically in a consistent manner across all languages using a universal alphabet?" asks Jaber Jabbour,
IPA is as u say too much for general use, altho it contains all the phonemes of known languages, as well as all known speech sounds
Many peple have tried to have a universal alphabet, without success. U can look them up, and see their weaknesses and strengths,

A language can be both spoken and script.
The script is for both reading and writing

I will concentrate on the relation of other alphabetic languages to English.
English spelling is closer to words in many other languages than the spoken word.
Partly this is because of shared roots, and partly because of shared words (e.g. computer, taxi) and partly because English takes a long time to change the spelling of words it borrows from other language, especially French.
Dialects also make a universal alphabet problematic for writing as we speak.

Many peple think that English should be spelled the Continental way.
Then 1. It would not have printed resemblances to words in other languages.
2. Consonants would be the same, but the problem is with the vowels, especially a e I o u, which only occasionally match, as in pasta, ballet, police, depot, tabu.

I think that the printed resemblances could be made greater, e.g with Latinat words. That would be a great advance.

But the two spelling sistems mismatch of the primary vowels is difficult to overcome.

When lerning another language, it can take an afternoon to lern a consistent alphabetic sistem, set out on a quarter page. So I am inclined to keep the mismatch, but make the English spelling sistem mor efficient, so that it is as easy to lern to read it. Some leeway is allowabl for writing, as long as it is within the phonemic basic sistem.

And see my article in OnLine Opinion
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=14976

@ozideas: you are right; there were several attempts to establish universal alphabets that didn't succeed. We hope that with the internet and technology, this attempt could have more chance.

We agree that if English was spelled the Continental way, it would have less resemblance to words in other languages. However, because of machine translation, this is not an issue anymore. We believe that the only remaining issue for cross-language understanding is pronunciation and oral communications.

A spelling reform that keeps the mismatch of English vs other languages would certainly be easier to implement in the immediate future, but there might be a need to do another spelling reform at a later stage to have consistency on a global scale.

I agree, Saypu, but it might be easier to transfer the English spelling sistem to another sistem later, after it has been cleand up. The public could handl that better.

Should the traditional long vowels be assigned to
á é í ó ú as in the Webster Dictionary or
ei i: ai ou ju: as in most dictionaries that use an abbreviated IPA notation. Try to read the following: (Webster code is slightly shorter here).

Í sé @ grát dél @v valú in bóth nótásh@nz.
*y sii * greyt diil *v vaeliu in bowth nowteysh*nz.

Both @ and * can be replaced with a turned e when available.
Those adept in traditional English spelling would find
the Webster notation easier. Most words could be correctly
identified without pronouncing them as a sequence of sound
signs. Reading by letter sound tends to be slow.

Logographic reading is fast but it take a long time to memorize
over 4000 word signs. You can read an alphabetic or highly
phonetic writing system slowly after about 15 min. of study.
There are only about 40 paired associates to learn.

The crib sheet for a phonemic notation is smaller than a postcard.

@Majorbett: Agreed that the Webster’s notation will always be shorter than the IPA’s. However, IPA’s would offer more flexibility with other languages.

It seems extremely arrogant (but typical) for a businessman to suddenly pretend to have a pet solution to a problem others spend years debating online, and before consulting with said others. Why doesn't he come up with a Unified Field Theory of physics, while he's at it, before his flight gets in? Or indeed, the solution to conflict in the Middle East?