Bad analogy. The system is bad for dyslexics, not for the rest of us...
Yes, it is bad for the rest of us. We take two years to master, just partially, what takes others two weeks to master completely. We waste two years. And we get mugged by people who are illiterate when they could be productive members of society. There are 20 million or so who could read with a decent spelling system, who now do not. Most are not criminals but many are on the welfare rolls, or earn less and pay less taxes than they could. And who pays the extra taxes to cover all this? The rest of us, and that *is* bad.
You began by suggesting that we revise the spelling system to help dyslexics. That didn't fly. Now you are trying to suggest that illiterate thugs got that way as the result of our spelling system. Our spelling system is responsible for all our social problems. Bull. It isn't that simple, unless you have blinders on and the argument, however illogical it may be, helps to promote your pet cause.
But it won't. Kids aren't learning for much deeper reasons than our spelling system and most know this. We all have the same spelling, but we don't all suffer from it's detrimental effects. Illiteracy is a basic social and cultural problem - not one resulting from a poor spelling system. Some kids choose not to learn. Changing the spelling system will not alter that fact. Changing things that affect their attitude and belief system might.
Your NEW argument doesn't wash any more than your last one.
Actually, I somehow feel like I am arguing with a troll. Is that the case? Did I fall victim to a troll? Sheesh, it almost feels like it b/c certainly no serious person could be advancing the silly ideas that you are floating.