In regards to image quality, the 18-55 = 18-135 = 18-200. So mediocre. Not awful, but mediocre. So any kit lens that you have to begin with isn't a good use of funds.
In regards to image quality and low light performance, the t2i = t3i = 60D = 7D. If you don't need an articulating screen or 5+ frames per second shooting, you will do just fine with the t2i. Off camera flash is nice and that is one of the biggest benefits to the t3i and above, but most people don't begin with that and by the time you are ready to do off camera flash, my guess is that you will be looking at an upgrade for the body.
When I first got into SLR photography, I had a 18-55 (medicore but not awful), a 75-300 (awful), and a 50mm f/1.8 (remarkably sharp when stopped down to 2.
. The only good lens out of those three was the 50mm so I kept it on my camera 90% of the time. I sold the 75-300 and got a 55-250 and the percentages were 5% for the 18-55, 50mm 70%, and the 55-250 for 25%. That's what I shot. Some people prefer wide angle photography, some prefer shallow depth of field portraits, some prefer telephoto zooms above 200mm focal length. If you don't know already, then you should figure out what type of photography you will gravitate to. But I think your best options are to have multiple lenses to cover a large focal area and then when you know what you like, then invest in upgraded lenses and sell the old. The 16-35 is excellent for full frame wide angle photography ($1300+) and the 10-22mm is a good option for crop sensor cameras ($600ish). If you shoot things at a distance, primes will get you excellent photo quality, or a 70-200mm f/4 IS is EXCELLENT at a $1000, or for indoor shooting, the 70-200 f/2.8L USM will suffice without tradining in your first born.
If you find that you are only doing portrait photography, a GREAT lens is the 135mm f/2. But again... all that will come in time and my initial suggestion of covering the range from 15-250 (or 200 with the L) is a good start.
Keep in mind that camera bodies depreciate in value SO MUCH FASTER than lenses. So you can buy a $500 camera body that is worth $200 after 4 years whereas that lens you may $500 may actually increase in value during that same period of time. So there is greater risk associated with the purchase of a body than there is with a lens.