Fusion waste has an extremely short half life, eg gone in 10 years even if you do absolutely nothing. Traditional fission reactors’ “waste” can just be used as fuel for the new generation of reactors, and if not that it can be reprocessed. We simply choose not to reprocess. It’s been done abroad in places such as France for many years. It’s a problem of will not science. It used to be the default: https://www.powermag.com/u-s-spent-nuclear-fuel-reprocessing-may-be-making-a-comeback-heres-why/
Discussion
The key is lack of political will combined with very short-term thinking. If they don’t build the plants to recycle the waste - which I assume is much more challenging - then we still have the waste issue. I’m also not sure we want the move-fast and break things crowd to be leading innovation on nuclear. If they get it wrong, there are huge implications.
The US has built 3(or more if you count those just at research and not commercial scale) reprocessing facilities but they were mothballed. Savannah river is still active but only processes a small amount for scientific research. So these facilities operate and/or exist and can restart with little money, time or effort. We literally have the infrastructure already and have run it successfully for decades, we just chose to turn it off. Alternatively we could ship to friendly nations such as UK, Japan, France, etc where they have active facilities.
It’s also not move fast and break things. This was done successfully at massive scale in the 1940s and 1950s before modern equipment or computers. It’s just fiat mindset to not recycle the fuel and instead throw it away when 99%+ of the energy is still freely available.