And your solution works for /k/ and /kh/, but runs into problems when you have a three-way contrast (/b/p/ph/ and /d/t/th). You can't write "buu" for "crab" just because you think it sounds like an English "b"; you need "b" for the actual /b/ sound.
I would argue that since food names are usually pronounced by non-speakers who will be unfamiliar with the romanization (or often don’t even know which language it’s coming from), the latter sort of transliteration is more useful. Egg foo young, not egg fuyung, egg furong, or daan fuyung.
I don't really think it matters, no one is consistent, no transliteration covers all cases. Unless maybe ipa? (which no one uses to communicate anyway).
But it's silly to say that it's the best system just because it is easiest for people like yourself.
I do think something IPA-inspired (k/kh, b/p/ph, d/t/th) is consistent and still usable. It will also encourage better pronunciation (at least for somewhat serious students) if they are trying to say the correct sound (unaspirated /k/) instead of approximating it with an English phoneme that isn't used in Thai (voiced /g/).
But I do think that an intuitive system is better than an IPA inspired system, and that's purely because of the fact that only 1% of people will be using it and understanding it. The other 99% will be using other, random, variations. However an intuitive system will at least catch most people who speaks English.
Any romanization that is more than "close enough" is a waste of time though, when compared to simply learning to write in Thai.