And then fewer people will buy Big Macs. Market forces in action.
Adding new regulations should be like adding a new software feature. There is a cost, so it should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.
Free wifi, they are super clean, cheap but delicious coffee, they offer good food above and beyond the cheeseburgers you're thinking about, and they have good ice cream cones for cheap as well.
People often go to McDonald's and use it as a coffee shop and do work.
McDonald's is much better than any other fast food place because they put so much effort into making them nice places to go.
Maybe you shouldn't be so judgemental about people who eat there
Exactly, and that is actually my point.
Since all these features have (obviously) some costs (as well as ingredients, staff, rent, energy, etc.), the moment McDonalds need hypothetically some more money to cover them they might simply increase the prices (correct) or introduce an extra "vague" fee through some weasel words (the Uber way in this case), the end effect is the same for both sides, the customer will pay a little more and McDonalds will have a larger income.
70 percent of mcdonalds business is drive through Big mac and fries are the #1 #2 most popular menu item.
BUT I suppose I could still be wrong with the above being true ...
Not at all, the BigMac/MacDonalds was only an example of something everyone knows about, given exclusively to make a layman's comparison, not to start a debate on free market rules, banana republics, regulations or affordable dietary preferences.
If you prefer, we can use as reference example - say - any other "service" chain, let's say Starbucks (probably a little less ubiquitous than McDonalds).
They make an effort to clean and keep tidy the premises, dispose of litter properly, and put the cost of that in the prices of what they serve, without any need to make a separate fee for that.
The weasel attitude is when Uber saying "for complete pricing transparency" calls a plain raise of price a fee as if it was an added service, a fee, by definition :
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/fee
is "an amount of money paid for a particular piece of work or for a particular right or service" so logically the income derived from a fee should go directly to cover costs of this particular service (which instead is implied).
They may be lying about how they're earmarking the funds, and that may be actionable, but that's a separate issue.