Removing odd irregularities from the spelling would make sense. Beyond that, there are serious problems due to varying accents and how the often irrelevant spelling differences do reflect a pronunciation difference SOMEWHERE most of the time. (This was actually the topic of my first linguistics essay years ago 
)
Beyond that, you'll be much more likely to get people to adopt digraphs like SH than new diacritics!
May you give me an example of such problems arising? I want this to mainly reform the alphabet and the phonemes they denote rather than a spelling reform. I should've phrased it differently.
E.g.
Hypothetical New English word:
Rhinojocum = nose game
This would be rendered "roynăjoukăm" which might offend some classicists lol but that's more what I'm looking for.
@Corybobory
What I plan to do with this, is kinda the same thing that went on with Interlingua where majority rules regarding cognates (in this case spelling).
So what I'd like to happen is this: These letters denoting phonemes will replace the present spelling of words so that they are more true to their oral renditions as well as those who are attempting to learn English (as well as those who already know it) can have an easier time with spelling.
Now regarding other nations, in 50 years, British and American English may change along the same lines due to technological advances in communication. Each nation can have its own spelling reform every now and then to at least basically reflect the pronunciation. So alphabet would be universal, spelling by country. And because of different pronunciations, words could be conformed so that they reflect the least difference if spelling were to be taken into account.
