You can call it greed, but it isn't. It's the free market at work.
We've had competition in the wireless business before. Fido was independent, and we had Clearnet. Notice that neither one could make a profit. Businesses are in business to make a profit.
Now, it seems that Rogers, Telus, Bell, etc. are probably earning excessive profits, but that hasn't always been so. The new wireless spectrum auction will bring in some competition and put some downward pressure on rates.
There are many reasons why wireless rates would be higher in Canada than a -stan country. Generally, rates are proportional with GDP per person. The richer a country is, the higher rates tend to be because richer people can afford to pay more and poorer people can afford to pay less. Wireless rates in most of eastern Europe are a lot cheaper than they are in the west, for example. Part of this is because wireless spectrum is a lot cheaper in poorer countries than it is in rich countries. (Witness the recent auction - $4.3 billion for 10 years of access to the 1700 MHz band. Rogers alone will be paying just shy of a billion dollars of that. Quebecor is paying almost $500 million.)
Call it greed if you want, but it isn't. If you want a free market, you are going to create a situation where companies want (and are entitled) to maximize their profits. If you want government to regulate the crap out of everything, then you'll have a less profit-oriented society, but that has other costs.
By the way, one thing that the government of Canada could do that would help this situation a lot is to ease the restriction on foreign ownership of wireless carriers. If foreign investment were permitted on a greater basis than now (right now ownership must be at least 53% domestic), we'd have more companies that would want into our wireless industry. The government of Canada chooses not to do this for various reasons, but I believe this restriction has significant effect on our rates.