Capitalist Island!

I had an idea as I was cooking dinner tonight. I would assume most people would have seen an episode or two of Survivor during the past two decades. My idea kind of spawned from that show. In the show, about 24 or 25 people (I have no idea) are "stranded" on a desert island, some tropical beach, or in the jungle and they have to co-exist for a small period of time while consecutively conniving and backstabbing their way to the final vote, or something. There is only one winner, though occasionally there are runners-up. I always thought it would be more interesting if the contestants actually had to survive on their own, though I guess humanity has not slipped to that level where televised real life and death encounters are filmed. 

In any case, this isn't about game shows or television, it's a thought-experiment. Imagine 100 people, 100 capitalists to be more accurate, which are stranded on a real desert island. On the island contains all of the necessary tools, equipment and resources for survival for all 100 capitalists for the foreseeable future, let's say the next 50 years. 

The rules of the game: 

Let's pretend the capitalists are sterile (wouldn't that be nice...) and androgynous in order to remove the element of sexual dominance (or lack thereof) from complicating the game. The resources, tools, and equipment include: shelter, means of subsistence (cattle, chickens, grains, water, sheep, etc) and recreational activities; a veritable mini-version of the world, though with no escape boats. 

However, the resources, equipment, and tools are not equally distributed among the players. At the start of Capitalist Island, one lucky capitalist gets ownership of 99% of the resources. The rest of the resources are distributed to the other 99 players in a manner that is roughly equivalent to the distribution of wealth today. Essentially there would be about 50 or so players with very, very little to start with, no shelter, no food, no water. 

There's a catch though, the one lucky capitalist will require aid from his fellow contestants in order to maintain his dominant resource allocation, the windows don't wash themselves, you know. 

Let's say that at the start of the game that there are weapons on the island as well, just to spice things up. 

The game starts immediately after the 100 contestants are situated in whatever shelters they are allocated (let's assume that they are representative of the actual conditions of the distribution of wealth in the world today, from cardboard boxes to a palace).

The game ends when there exists are general "equilibrium" among the players; which could mean that there are no players left, 100 players left, 56, 2, or any number in between.

The thought experiment:

What kind of distribution of wealth would ensue after a few days? What type of "economy" would emerge? Would it be the economy where the 1 owner of the 99% of resources exerts his dominance over the rest of his fellow islanders, through a select group of courtiers and tough-guys, until the end of all their days?

One can only guess that given 3 or 4 days of desperation, the lowest 25 capitalists on the "totem" pole would have either starved to death, or begged for food from one of the other 74 contestants, or the 1 "initial ruler". 

What kind of distribution of wealth would emerge after a few months? The richest capitalist will soon realize that tending his massive amounts of resources requires labor. What type of arrangements will he make with his 99 compadres? 

Will the 99 other capitalists unite and overthrow the 1? 

Will factions emerge, mini-wars ensue and one victor rise from the ashes?

Will they divide the resources in 1% shares, work together and co-exist in harmony? 

Will the 1 kill off the other 99, or vice-versa? 

Will there just emerge a constant re-organization of the wealth on the island with various capitalists vying for the top spot? 

Would some other completely new arrangement come up that nobody foresaw? 

I think it would be fascinating to watch and evaluate. 

I also think it's highly doubtful that the economic system which emerged would resemble anything like what is in place today.

What do I really mean?

Obviously throwing 100 people on a desert island in a struggle for survival is not a realistic experiment. Though, in the context of our planet, what is the difference? We are all on this one planet together, there is nowhere else for us to go. The distribution of wealth and resources is completely askew today and seems to be getting worse.

Will we find it in ourselves to create a more egalitarian society in which resources are allocated more equally?

If not, what is the end-game?

These are serious questions and there isn't anybody talking about them.