You may need to read up more about it. I was always wondering about this supposed reduction of waste products and it seems to be an accounting trick. It apparently does result in less production of waste actinides, but not in fission products. But the waste actinides from regular reactors can be easily recovered by reprocessing into uranium and plutonium as new fuel, and the amount of fission products is about the same (as one would expect). A thorium reactor requires conventional fuel to get started, as thorium does not produce sufficient spontaneous neutrons and itself is not fissionable. The process hinges on the breeding of U-233 as fuel, accompanied by some U-232, which is highly radioactive. It is a different fuel system with its own problems and requirements.

The proponents also like to invoke new and different reactor design concepts, but those would have to be developed and worked out before committing them to production. The more you get into the details, the less apparent the other virtues seem to be. Thorium is good to have and good to use, but we have no shortage of uranium, so there is no urgency. It is not a panacea.