More often than a faulty initial design, it's because of a something not being followed, e.g. the design called for one type of material or process and another was used during construction, either on accident or on purpose but without correctly doing the math to verify that it will work.

I think the first picture is not showing structural columns: they're more a symptom (buckling as the building is moving) as opposed to the cause.

As the sibling says, that first picture shows essentially interior wall framing. They shouldn't really be seeing any load!

They are buckling because the floors and ceilings are bending!

Scroll down and there is a picture of a much thicker support pillar, though still seems thin? Maybe just the context in frame doesn't do it justice.

Most likely the building gets stabilized and then anyone involved gets embroiled in lawsuits and it stays standing half finished for years. One Seaport is a famous recent example of an under construction skyscraper getting halted for structural issues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/161_Maiden_Lane

Yes, sometimes gravity resolves the problem for you.

Tie every helicopter you can find to the roof, gas the bent bit off, haul it away and drop it somewhere?

They'll likely shore it up with hydraulic props - probably going through the floor and ceiling to floor slabs above and below - to stabilise it, and then start demolishing the building bit by bit.

Given all the bad press around things like the millennium tower, I think once you have an issue like this, the building is done. No one will want to live there. And given structural problems with load bearing beams, I would expect the building has to be demolished. But maybe they can demolish it top down partially and rebuild up from the compromised area if the city and engineers deem that safe.

Spreading out requires more non-foot travel to get places. Density means things can be closer.