so a star A at the distance 13.7B ly from us is running away with "c". Until you believe that today is an unique moment in time, we can expect that in 100M year

so a star A at the distance 13.7B ly from us is running away with "c". Until you believe that today is an unique moment in time, we can expect that in 100M years a star B at the distance 13.8B ly will be also moving with "c" away from us. If we allow for accelerated expansion of the Universe, then it means that the star B is closer to us then the star A (with the star A moving away faster than "c" in 100M years from today - i.e. accelerated expansion) - i.e. today the star B is closer to us than 13.7B ly and runs away slower then "c", and thus in the next 100M years the star B would be expected to make a journey longer than 100M ly - from some point today closer to us than 13.7B ly to the point at 13.8B ly in 100M years - i.e. it would need to run away faster then "c" during those 100M years which is clearly a contradiction. That leads to conclusion that whatever speed a star runs away with today, it will be running away with the same speed tomorrow - that means decreasing Hubble constant - which is normal giving the same energy being spread in a bigger and bigger space. And when it comes to observing the observable Universe - the star A will always run away with "c", and whatever stars B are closer to us then the star A ( and thus running away slower than "c" today), those stars B will never run away faster than "c" - thus the light from them will always come to us. Note: the stars which are farther away moving faster isn't acceleration of expansion. Acceleration of expansion would be if the same stars were running away faster tomorrow than today - which would clearly lead to the contradiction pointed above. Hubble constant decreasing with time is the only way to avoid that contradiction. That also probably explains different Hubble constant values we currently have - as they are obtained using signals from different points in the Universe history.